Precarity and Risk in the fourth age: Reframing the end of life using life course and political economic theory

This paper proposed that precarity, risk and insecurity in the fourth age needs to be reframed using lifecourse theory. Instead of othering, biomedicalising and individualising the fourth age, I argue that precariousness is an experience which is politically and socially constructed. By presenting a case study of end-of-life experience, this paper aims to engender empathy across generations and consider precarity as a fluid, shifting human experience (Butler, 2004). For instance, uncertainty at the end of life is considerable, particularly when not dying of a terminal illness. Thus, the dying trajectory of someone in later life represents the antithesis of independence and agency, which are prevalent values in the Global North. The inconsistencies and uncertainties in palliative care provision have led to the suffering of those in the fourth age who are nearing the end of their lives. Pain and discomfort, hospital admissions and invasive interventions, have influenced perceptions of dying and these have been magnified during the COVID-19 pandemic globally. I will discuss the impact of patchy, inconsistent, and non-existent end of life care on understandings of precarity in the fourth age, which are products of funding decisions based on social, cultural and political discourse. This paper will also highlight Azmanova’s work (2020) on ‘Precarity Capitalism’ and explain how it can be used to understand the social, economic, and political structures which produce precarious experiences, but also to provide hope, that precarity can and should be challenged via national and international decision making, via intergenerational solidarity.