Elderly "living together"

[BlueEyedLady]

To clarify I was not a 14 year old volunteer, I was a 16 year old CNA. Part of our training was about the sexual needs of the elderly. And there were plenty of times that 2 residents would go in to one of their rooms, shut the door, and hang a do not disturb sign.

And it wasn’t just the married couples either. As long as both people were mentally with it and consenting we had to allow it. They are adults, the nursing home was their home, and they had free will over their sex lives.

There was actually a fair bit of romance and yes, even sex in the nursing home.

 

[EasterJoy]

To clarify I was not a 14 year old volunteer, I was a 16 year old CNA. Part of our training was about the sexual needs of the elderly. And there were plenty of times that 2 residents would go in to one of their rooms, shut the door, and hang a do not disturb sign.

And it wasn’t just the married couples either. As long as both people were mentally with it and consenting we had to allow it. They are adults, the nursing home was their home, and they had free will over their sex lives.

There was actually a fair bit of romance and yes, even sex in the nursing home.

That is also the kind of expectation that is tolerated in secular college dormitories these days. There is not much to be done about it. Sometimes the boundaries put on a profession by the secular world prevent a person from saying anything, but when the question concerns one’s family, then one is allowed to speak up.

I have heard of situations where the staff allowed the mentally incompetent to engage in sexual acts with each other. That is the equivalent of statutory rape, and the staff was dismissed. I don’t know whether they faced any charges.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

I cannot think of a Church teaching that involves a child correcting a parent.

Well if your parents were stealing, murdering, etc. then you would correct them, would you not?

So clearly one can correct one’s parents on some things, and I don’t see why you can’t do it on all of them, really. You just need to be respectful. Then again, you should always be respectful… even to a stranger.

I’m not saying this is a sin though and I would probably leave it alone.

 

[minkymurph]

I sense some ageism in this discussion. I get the same from my college students who are shocked when I mention in my Adult Development Psychology course that elderly couples in their 80’s and beyond still have sex. The notion that older people are mostly physically ill, feeble-minded, and live in nursing homes is a societal misconception.

There probably is. However, I think it’s fair to conclude a smaller percentage of the over
80’s are engage in sexual intercourse on a regular basis than, say, under 30’s? I would say it’s also fair to conclude a smaller percentage of the over 80’s regularly engage in casual sex than the under 30’s, are therefore this age group are less at risk from sexually transmitted diseases? Of course there are exceptions to every rule, and I’ve no doubt some over 80’s may surprise you, and some under 30’s may not be having sex at all. However, ‘safe sex’ and ‘use a condom’ campaigns are mostly directed moreso at the young than the over 80’s.

I don’t think older people are mostly physically ill, feeble-minded and live in nursing homes. However, what I do think is as we get older our priorities change and, generally speaking of course, amazing sex on a regular basis isn’t as essential - other things become more important. I heard this discussed on a radio programme recently and a man in his 60’s said he doesn’t understand all this fuss about sex as he would rather have a good fry and a nice cup of tea.

To whom it may concern - a ‘fry’ consists of bacon, sausage, fried egg, potato bread and soda bread - and possibly beans, mushrooms or a grilled tomato thrown in for good measure.

Maybe we should test the theory and start a poll to determine which people would prefer and indication of age group.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

There probably is. However, I think it’s fair to conclude a smaller percentage of the over
80’s are engage in sexual intercourse on a regular basis than, say, under 30’s? I would say it’s also fair to conclude a smaller percentage of the over 80’s regularly engage in casual sex than the under 30’s, are therefore this age group are less at risk from sexually transmitted diseases? Of course there are exceptions to every rule, and I’ve no doubt some over 80’s may surprise you, and some under 30’s may not be having sex at all. However, ‘safe sex’ and ‘use a condom’ campaigns are mostly directed moreso at the young than the over 80’s.

I don’t think older people are mostly physically ill, feeble-minded and live in nursing homes. However, what I do think is as we get older our priorities change and, generally speaking of course, amazing sex on a regular basis isn’t as essential - other things become more important. I heard this discussed on a radio programme recently and a man in his 60’s said he doesn’t understand all this fuss about sex as he would rather have a good fry and a nice cup of tea.

To whom it may concern - a ‘fry’ consists of bacon, sausage, fried egg, potato bread and soda bread - and possibly beans, mushrooms or a grilled tomato thrown in for good measure.

Maybe we should test the theory and start a poll to determine which people would prefer and indication of age group.

Most days, I’ll take the fry!

 

[AnneTeresa]

I sense some ageism in this discussion. I get the same from my college students who are shocked when I mention in my Adult Development Psychology course that elderly couples in their 80’s and beyond still have sex. The notion that older people are mostly physically ill, feeble-minded, and live in nursing homes is a societal misconception.

Exactly what I was thinking while reading this.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

OP, any further thoughts? We’ve got 44 responses to your question, how about if you chime in now?

 

[EasterJoy]

There probably is. However, I think it’s fair to conclude a smaller percentage of the over 80’s are engage in sexual intercourse on a regular basis than, say, under 30’s? I would say it’s also fair to conclude a smaller percentage of the over 80’s regularly engage in casual sex than the under 30’s, are therefore this age group are less at risk from sexually transmitted diseases?

Do not forget that 80 year olds were 30 once. If they picked up a herpes infection 50 or 60 years ago, they still have it. Oh, let’s look at our calendars…that was the 1950s and 1960s! Don’t believe what you see on Mad Men–nobody was swinging back then.

IOW, people over 65 are the very people who were sexually active back before “safe sex” was ever heard of, before seatbelts were used by anyone other than airplane pilots. This is a generation that grew up drinking out of garden hoses and riding in cars with their feet dangling over the tailgate, and some of them are still not impressed with the importance of using risk assessment to alter one’s behavior. Also, people who are or who consider themselves to be infertile are more likely to be, let us say, unguarded about their choice of partners because they believe they are less likely to face any consequences.

Just by physical aging, it will be very rare that any of them are engaging in sex as frequently as when they were younger. That lowers their risk somewhat, but it doesn’t eliminate the chance that they could be passing diseases around.

 

[Bookcat]

Should opposite- sex- elderly be “living together”?

– old age does not come with a new set of moral principles (though there could be some new things added etc).

Call one of Catholic Answers Staff Apologists to discuss issues further --live.

How do to deal with what needs to be dealt with?

with truth, charity, prayer, prudence…

Pope Benedict XVI Quote-

““Being concerned for each other” also entails being concerned for their spiritual well-being. Here I would like to mention an aspect of the Christian life, which I believe has been quite forgotten: fraternal correction in view of eternal salvation. Today, in general, we are very sensitive to the idea of charity and caring about the physical and material well-being of others, but almost completely silent about our spiritual responsibility towards our brothers and sisters. This was not the case in the early Church or in those communities that are truly mature in faith, those which are concerned not only for the physical health of their brothers and sisters, but also for their spiritual health and ultimate destiny. The Scriptures tell us: “Rebuke the wise and he will love you for it. Be open with the wise, he grows wiser still, teach the upright, he will gain yet more” (Prov 9:8ff). Christ himself commands us to admonish a brother who is committing a sin (cf. Mt 18:15). The verb used to express fraternal correction - elenchein – is the same used to indicate the prophetic mission of Christians to speak out against a generation indulging in evil (cf. Eph 5:11). The Church’s tradition has included “admonishing sinners” among the spiritual works of mercy. It is important to recover this dimension of Christian charity. We must not remain silent before evil. I am thinking of all those Christians who, out of human regard or purely personal convenience, adapt to the prevailing mentality, rather than warning their brothers and sisters against ways of thinking and acting that are contrary to the truth and that do not follow the path of goodness. Christian admonishment, for its part, is never motivated by a spirit of accusation or recrimination. It is always moved by love and mercy, and springs from genuine concern for the good of the other. As the Apostle Paul says: “If one of you is caught doing something wrong, those of you who are spiritual should set that person right in a spirit of gentleness; and watch yourselves that you are not put to the test in the same way” (Gal 6:1). In a world pervaded by individualism, it is essential to rediscover the importance of fraternal correction, so that together we may journey towards holiness. Scripture tells us that even “the upright falls seven times” (Prov 24:16); all of us are weak and imperfect (cf. 1 Jn 1:8). It is a great service, then, to help others and allow them to help us, so that we can be open to the whole truth about ourselves, improve our lives and walk more uprightly in the Lord’s ways. There will always be a need for a gaze which loves and admonishes, which knows and understands, which discerns and forgives (cf. Lk 22:61), as God has done and continues to do with each of us.”

Read the whole thing here—

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/messages/lent/documents/hf_ben-xvi_mes_20111103_lent-2012_en.html

 

[EasterJoy]

Good quote, Bookcat!!

Pope Benedict XVI Quote-

““Being concerned for each other” also entails being concerned for their spiritual well-being. Here I would like to mention an aspect of the Christian life, which I believe has been quite forgotten: fraternal correction in view of eternal salvation. Today, in general, we are very sensitive to the idea of charity and caring about the physical and material well-being of others, but almost completely silent about our spiritual responsibility towards our brothers and sisters. This was not the case in the early Church or in those communities that are truly mature in faith, those which are concerned not only for the physical health of their brothers and sisters, but also for their spiritual health and ultimate destiny. The Scriptures tell us: “Rebuke the wise and he will love you for it. Be open with the wise, he grows wiser still, teach the upright, he will gain yet more” (Prov 9:8ff). Christ himself commands us to admonish a brother who is committing a sin (cf. Mt 18:15). The verb used to express fraternal correction - elenchein – is the same used to indicate the prophetic mission of Christians to speak out against a generation indulging in evil (cf. Eph 5:11). **The Church’s tradition has included “admonishing sinners” among the spiritual works of mercy. It is important to recover this dimension of Christian charity. **We must not remain silent before evil. I am thinking of all those Christians who, out of human regard or purely personal convenience, adapt to the prevailing mentality, rather than warning their brothers and sisters against ways of thinking and acting that are contrary to the truth and that do not follow the path of goodness. Christian admonishment, for its part, is never motivated by a spirit of accusation or recrimination. It is always moved by love and mercy, and springs from genuine concern for the good of the other. As the Apostle Paul says: “If one of you is caught doing something wrong, those of you who are spiritual should set that person right in a spirit of gentleness; and watch yourselves that you are not put to the test in the same way” (Gal 6:1). In a world pervaded by individualism, it is essential to rediscover the importance of fraternal correction, so that together we may journey towards holiness. Scripture tells us that even “the upright falls seven times” (Prov 24:16); all of us are weak and imperfect (cf. 1 Jn 1:8). It is a great service, then, to help others and allow them to help us, so that we can be open to the whole truth about ourselves, improve our lives and walk more uprightly in the Lord’s ways. There will always be a need for a gaze which loves and admonishes, which knows and understands, which discerns and forgives (cf. Lk 22:61), as God has done and continues to do with each of us.”

Read the whole thing here—

vatican.va/holy_father/be…t-2012_en.html

 

[maltmom]

If Viagra treats what ails you, you could also just get married. It is the people who can’t marry because they can’t perform the marital act who assume that the principles have changed…but they haven’t. Genital activities outside the marital act are not morally licit, even for those incapable of marriage.

Easter Joy, I’m a new Catholic and you just hit one something that I didn’t know. Does the church teach that since I can’t have children and I’m now of the age that the men I meet could very well have a problem in this area, that if I meet the most wonderful man in the world who can’t perform the marital act to completion that we cannot marry?

I have a friend who would not allow her son to spend the night at her mother’s house b/c the mother’s “boyfriend” lived with her. Since they slept in the same bedroom he would have to leave the house when the son slept over.

 

[minkymurph]

Do not forget that 80 year olds were 30 once. If they picked up a herpes infection 50 or 60 years ago, they still have it. Oh, let’s look at our calendars…that was the 1950s and 1960s! Don’t believe what you see on Mad Men–nobody was swinging back then.

IOW, people over 65 are the very people who were sexually active back before “safe sex” was ever heard of, before seatbelts were used by anyone other than airplane pilots. This is a generation that grew up drinking out of garden hoses and riding in cars with their feet dangling over the tailgate, and some of them are still not impressed with the importance of using risk assessment to alter one’s behavior. Also, people who are or who consider themselves to be infertile are more likely to be, let us say, unguarded about their choice of partners because they believe they are less likely to face any consequences.

Just by physical aging, it will be very rare that any of them are engaging in sex as frequently as when they were younger. That lowers their risk somewhat, but it doesn’t eliminate the chance that they could be passing diseases around.

Yes, but they are not in their thirties anymore.

I’ve never actually heard of ‘Mad Men.’

While there are exceptions to every rule, does being infertile not lower one’s sex drive?

I wasn’t suggesting being over a certain age eliminates the chance of passing diseases around. The point I was making, as you say, there are more young people who engage in sex with multiple partners than 80 year old’s. Besides, I believe the OP was talking about engaging in sex with one person. If they are monogamous they will not pass on an STD to anyone else, or contract an STD from each other. As such, I don’t think the risk of STD’s being passed around are in this particular equation.

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

About fraternal correction and our elders…

When I was in my 20s, my widowed grandfather shacked up with a lady friend the last three or four years of his life. Both of them were Catholic, but neither of them wanted inheritance troubles or their SSI to take a hit, so they decided against marriage. She moved into his house. And since they shared a bed, I can only assume they did the hoogly boogly on occasion.

They both knew they were sinning.

What did I do about it? Nothing. Why? Because if I had grandpa would most probably would have knocked me on my rear end for presuming to be able to tell him anything about how he was living his life, corporeally and spiritually. And after he got done with me, my mother would have verbally skinned me alive for presuming to be able to tell my elders how to live their lives. Believe me, I could have spoken with all the love and compassion in the world, and I still would have received a huge dose of their own, special brand of fraternal correction.

So yes, fraternal correction is a component of our lives. But who we fraternally correct (safely) really depends on individual circumstances, our judgment, and our best guess as to how the information will be received.

Luna

 

[MissRose73]

I would never dream of telling an older relative how to live their life even if they do something I disagree with, if they’ve made it to a certain age they have to be doing something right. I know I would be told off by the person and other family members for interference even if they knew I was right and what they are doing is sinful. I’ve got enough on my plate with my mother interfering in various family members’ lives as it is, and it would be a full time job to tell my mother to stop telling people how to conduct their lives according to her standards.

Many people live together without sex becoming involved one bit. Others may wish to engage in sex, and seek out a partner either keeping their separate homes or combining a household. I know my grandmothers never remarried after the deaths of their husbands but I have no idea if they entertained the thoughts of remarriage or even sharing their home with another man not related to them via marriage or blood. Most likely, they chose to remain unmarried to be able to get their late husbands’ work pensions & widows benefits.

 

[CatherineOH]

If Viagra treats what ails you, you could also just get married. It is the people who can’t marry because they can’t perform the marital act who assume that the principles have changed…but they haven’t. Genital activities outside the marital act are not morally licit, even for those incapable of marriage.

Huh?.. I think you mean ARE morally illicit , or please elaborate …

 

[m_crane]

It’s amazing how many people are willing to excuse immoral behavior because:

I don’t want him/her to be lonely
he/she needs companionship.
he/she is really a good person
he/she might lose money if they do the right thing
I want him/her to be happy

How about thinking about how lonely and unhappy and truely desolate he/she will become when they step away from their relationship with God for earthly pleasures?

Man, if I was old the last thing I would want to do is to put myself in a position where I might commit a moral sin . And I certainly wouldn’t want teach my loved ones that marriage isn’t a necessary in order a man and a woman to live together.

This is just another example of immoral behavior that’s rampant in our secular society!

 

[shipwrkd]

My elderly father is contemplating buying a home and refurbishing it with the help of a lady friend, and then moving in together. I do not feel that this is right for many reasons. I am uncertain how I should address this with him. How would it change things if they were to live in separate bedrooms vs. sharing the same bedroom.

I would appreciate answers on Church teaching of this living arrangement, and also how to deal with this as a family issue.

Thank you very much.

You need more information, there are too many things your uncertain of. My mother took in an elderly gentleman after he was unable to live alone and it was the best thing that happened for them both. No sex, separate bedrooms, Mom was more of a caregiver then anything else. The companionship that they shared extended both their lives. Toward the end of his life, I admired her for the care and compassion she showed to her housemate. I believe it earned her a higher place in heaven.
If it’s companionship they are seeking, encourage it. If it’s more, tell him your feelings, but don’t ruin your relationship with him over it. At the end of the day, it’s his decision as to how he wishes to live his Faith. Best of luck with this.

 

[EasterJoy]

Easter Joy, I’m a new Catholic and you just hit one something that I didn’t know. Does the church teach that since I can’t have children and I’m now of the age that the men I meet could very well have a problem in this area, that if I meet the most wonderful man in the world who can’t perform the marital act to completion that we cannot marry?

It does not mean that they run a test before you marry to see what you can do, no. It does mean that a tribunal would find a marriage null if a case were brought before them and it was established that one of the parties was perpetually incapable of intercourse even at the time the vows were taken. (This is not retroactive; if you consummate the marriage, it does not render the marriage null if you are stricken with some ill fortune that robs one or both of you of your ability to complete the marital act after that.)

**Can. 1084 §1. **Antecedent and perpetual impotence to have intercourse, whether on the part of the man or the woman, whether absolute or relative, nullifies marriage by its very nature.

§2. If the impediment of impotence is doubtful, whether by a doubt about the law or a doubt about a fact, a marriage must not be impeded nor, while the doubt remains, declared null.

§3. Sterility neither prohibits nor nullifies marriage, without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 1098.

If you get married in good faith with the belief that you are both capable of intercourse and then later cannot consumate, as far as I know you are not morally bound to seek a decree of nullity. If you are aware that you are not capable of marriage, you cannot morally lie about that, but I don’t think that means that you* have* to seek to have your marriage declared null because you’ve never found yourself physically able to consummate the marriage.

This is a question for a canon lawyer or a priest, though. They would actually know. I only know that in theory a person must be capable of intercourse in order to validly marry.

 

[EasterJoy]

Genital activities outside the marital act are not morally licit, even for those incapable of marriage.

Huh?.. I think you mean ARE morally illicit , or please elaborate …

Morally illicit and not morally licit are at least close to the same thing?

 

[FromTheAshes777]

It’s amazing how many people are willing to excuse immoral behavior because:

I don’t want him/her to be lonely
he/she needs companionship.
he/she is really a good person
he/she might lose money if they do the right thing
I want him/her to be happy

How about thinking about how lonely and unhappy and truely desolate he/she will become when they step away from their relationship with God for earthly pleasures?

Man, if I was old the last thing I would want to do is to put myself in a position where I might commit a moral sin . And I certainly wouldn’t want teach my loved ones that marriage isn’t a necessary in order a man and a woman to live together.

This is just another example of immoral behavior that’s rampant in our secular society!

Don’t forget…
“But they love each other!”