Monthly Archives for December 2025

2025: A Year on the “Age Beat” in Rhode Island

Published in RINewsToday on December 29, 2025

Throughout 2025, this “Age Beat” columnist published a weekly commentary covering an extensive list of aging, healthcare, and medical issues. During this year, this columnist followed Congressional debates inside the Beltway involving Medicare, Medicaid, reauthorization of the Older Americans Act, and Social Security, reporting on how these federal policy proposals would affect older Rhode Islanders.  During the latest legislative session of the Rhode Island General Assembly, policy debates on Smith Hill were also covered in my weekly commentaries, examining how the proposed bills or enacted laws would impact state programs and services serving Rhode Island’s growing older population.

After reviewing the latest U.S. Census Data, it becomes very clear that the state’s aging population continues to grow.  For more than twenty-five years, I have tracked and continue to follow the graying of Rhode Island’s population.  Through more than 50 articles published in 2025 in Blackstone Valley Call & times and its sister publications, RINewstoday, Senior Digest and other statewide outlets, these stories have decoded complicated public policy debates, and demographic trends to shed light as to how they affect the daily lives of older adults, their caregivers, and nonprofit organizations that serve them.   

Some might interpret my weekly reporting as a way that specifically looks at older adults as one group of people.  However, others might see them on how aging impacts our own family members and our neighbors, and how we all deal with real-life challenges as we get older.

 Themes from Past Year’s Coverage

 Over the past year, several themes have become clear:  the economics of growing older and financially surviving retirement; staying safe from increasing sophisticated scams, public health issues surrounding loneliness and food insecurity; limited public transportation, finding a primary care physician, and managing multiple chronic illnesses.  Many of these commentaries also looked closely at state and federal policies that led to cuts in Medicare and Medicaid; the pressure points placed on Rhode Island’s safety net; and the ongoing policy questions the Rhode Island General Assembly is asking about how to help older adults stay independent at home—not just to live  longer, but live better.

You learn very quickly that national policy debates don’t go the same way here,, if you’ve lived in the Ocean State for a while.  A change in federal requirements of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) or changing eligibility requirements and cuts to Medicaid funding are not distant Washington stories reported by the Washington Post or New York Times especially if they affect food, meal deliveries and health care provided in Providence, Pawtucket, Woonsocket, or Westerly. A change in Medicare drug pricing is not an abstract concept if it determines whether your older neighbor can fill a lifesaving prescription—or whether your spouse’s non-drug compliance stretches pills just to make them last.

 Many of these articles were tied to timely triggers—AARP reports detailing findings of national surveys and polls, a Senate Aging Committee or Congressional hearing putting a spotlight on an aging issue, a proposed legislative proposal being considered by Congress or the Rhode Island General Assembly. But the reporting doesn’t just give a concise summary of a policy issue. The point of these commentaries is to shed light on the issues by asking: “So what does this mean for older Rhode Islanders?” Where are the funding gaps?”  “Who is being left out?  “What can be done now while larger reforms slowly grind their way forward, only to be enacted years later?”

 Many of the commentaries published this year focused on out-of- pocket costs that increase with one’s aging —especially skyrocketing medical expenses. Even when Medicare covers a significant portion of one’s care, many older adults still face overwhelming costs, from premiums and co-pays to dental and vision needs, to uncovered services and especially costly prescription drugs and nursing home care.  The reporting also examined pending questions about Medicare’s financial future, including whether the program will be able to pay beneficiaries full benefits beyond 2033, or face potential benefit cuts.  Even the Washington, DC-based National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare’s call for expanding the retirement program, along with raising the cap to enable Social Security to pay its bills made it into these commentaries.

 Another common theme in this year’s published commentaries is the recognition that aging affects not only our bodies and wallets, but also our emotions and relationships as well. The past year’s reporting on the role of loneliness and isolation serves as a reminder of how harmful they can be, especially when they lead to worse health outcomes.  In these writings, the goal is not to romanticize “community” but to show how social connection and networks in a “community” can be a good way to improve one’s health.

 The commentaries on loneliness do not regard the negative emotional response as a personal deficiency but rather as a significant policy concern influenced by the persistent scarcity of affordable housing, inadequate public transportation, mobility limitations, the loss of spouses and friends, and communities designed around the use of cars rather than their pedestrian walkability or accessibility.  How we view this matters because it is the framing that shifts the discussion away from “Why don’t older adults get out more?” to “What community barriers make connections harder to make—and what public supports are needed to make community connections possible?”

 Taking a New Look at Being Age-Friendly

The commentary on “age-friendly” thinking shows how Rhode Island’s 39 cities and towns can change their programs, services, and public spaces to keep older adults engaged in their community instead of primarily isolated. The announcement that the City of Pawtucket had joined Newport, Cranston, Providence, Westerly, and Bristol to become one of Rhode Island’s Age-Friendly Network Communities is an example.  We hope to report on more communities doing the same.

Over the past year, coverage of food insecurity, and a profile on the Meals on Wheels of Rhode Island, have helped to answer bigger policy questions:  What happens when demand goes up but and payments don’t? How do people get on waiting lists?  “What does “service disruption” mean for someone living at home? And how much does it cost—both in money and in people, when these programs have to be cut back?

One of the most important things we’ve reported on this year is consumer protection, especially when it comes to scams that target older people, because they are often the ones that more easily fall for scams because they have savings and are concerned about them, aren’t as familiar with digital manipulation, or have cognitive impairment.  There are many reasons why this topic is important right now, especially with new technology being used to spread scams.  And the Rhode Island General Assembly has been quick to act.  One commentary informed readers that Rhode Island has passed a new law to crack down on Crypto ATM fraud, making it the 12th state to do so.

 The best reporting on scams doesn’t just explain the tricks and why people fall for them – it also keeps the reader updated as to how scams keep changing.  Plus, it gives you practical tips as to how to avoid them, like pausing before you respond, double-checking what you’re told, and turning to someone you trust if something feels off, verifying, and seeking trusted help before acting. I wrote about these tips in great detail.

These consumer protection commentaries didn’t blame the victims, rather by framing scams as a systemic program caused by new technology and weak verification standards. And it makes this point clear.  Scams are not just seen as financial crimes; they can also cause shame, isolation, and stress that can harm your health.

 Caregiving is also another common topic in this year’s published commentaries. Aging advocates will tell you that caregivers are the hidden backbone of providing care to those in need.  They will tell you that family members, friends, and neighbors help out in ways that would otherwise need paid services or institutional care.  An AARP report says that about 121,000 in Rhode Islanders provided unpaid care to others in 2021 – estimated to be valued monetarily at over $2.1 billion.

 These commentaries on caregiving don’t talk about it in terms of sentiment, but in terms of policy, taking a look at time costs, impact on jobs, burnout, and the lack of enough respite support. The reporting also helps to shed light on common caregiver stress, and that needing help is not a personal failure but a normal result of  demographics and underfunded state programs and services.

When National Policy Hits Close to Home

In Rhode Island, where community-based services are important  to “aging in place,” the weekly coverage has helped readers to understand the whole long-term care continuum—from home care to day care to senior centers to assisted living to nursing home care, if needed.

 At best, access to health care is uneven; transportation is a barrier to many; affordable, accessible housing is limited; and the Medicaid-funded workforce that helps people stay at home is overworked and underpaid.  Older adults are dealing with rising costs for food, utilities, and rent or home upkeep, as well as the effects of inflation.

 Although many of this year’s commentaries put the spotlight on policy issues that need to be fixed, they also provide state policy makers ideas to solve these issues.  These are advocacy groups age-friendly planning; stronger protections for consumers; smarter use of technology; and increased state funding that treats community-based supports as cost-effective interventions rather than optional add-ons.

Cooling Heated Political Banter at the Christmas Dinner

Published in RINewsToday on December 22, 2025

Over the years, nearly everyone has encountered an iconic archetype at holiday gatherings: “Uncle Bob.” At Christmas dinner, Bob predictably launches into uncomfortable political arguments. Other family members scramble to avoid his decisive political chatter—some using humor, others retreating to watch football games on the tube or quickly starting side conversations to dodge conflict.

Last December, the American Psychological Association (APA) released survey findings that underscored just how common—and stressful—these moments have become at Christmas gatherings. Following a divisive presidential election, most U.S. adults said they wanted to avoid political discussions at the dinner table during the holidays, especially with family members whose views differed from their own.

According to the APA survey, released on Dec. 10, 2024, more than 7 in 10 adults (72%) hoped to not talk politics with family during the holidays. While 65% said they were not worried that political discussions would damage relationships, nearly 2 in 5 adults (39%) reported feeling stressed at the thought of politics arising at holiday gatherings.

The survey’s findings also indicated that nearly 2 in 5 adults (38%) said they are avoiding family they disagree with over the holidays. Younger adults were significantly more likely than adults 65 or older to say they plan to avoid family over the holidays (45% adults ages 18–34, 47% ages 35–44, 42% ages 45–54, and 32% ages 55–64 vs. 23% ages 65+).

Fast forward to today: political disagreements within families have not disappeared, maybe even intensified, and the upcoming Christmas season may once again be ripe for tension and emotional strain and stress.

A Surprising Strategy for Reducing Political Conflict

New research, however, may offer a practical way to cool political tensions before they ruin a Christmas gathering. According to research published by the American Psychological Association, (APA), when engaging in political discussions, talking about what you oppose—rather than what you support—can make others more open to your views.

“In an era of deepening political polarization, our research offers a counterintuitive insight into how we can better communicate across ideological lines: Talk about what you oppose, not what you support,” said lead author Rhia Catapano, PhD, of the University of Toronto, in a Dec. 15, 2025 statement announcing the findings.

In a series of experiments involving more than 10,000 participants, researchers examined how people express their political opinions and how framing—support versus opposition—affects how others respond. The study, Talking About What We Support Versus Oppose Affects Others’ Openness to Our Views, was published online in the Dec. 15, 2025, issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

In one experiment, people were randomly chosen to either provide their viewpoint on sensitive issues like abortion and gun control or hear someone else’s perspective on the same issue. All participants were told they were paired with someone who did not share their views, although no actual matching occurred.

Messages were carefully framed to express either support or opposition to a particular issue. For example, a statement supporting abortion message might read, “I support allowing abortions,” while a message framed in opposition would read, “I oppose abortion bans.”

Senders rated how persuasive they believed their messages would be in swaying their imaginary receiver. Receivers were asked to respond to messages from imaginary senders, reporting how closely the messages aligned with their values and whether they were open to reconsidering their own views.

Although senders believed support-framed messages would be more persuasive, the opposite was true. Receivers were significantly more open to messages framed in terms of opposition.

In a different experiment, researchers recruited Reddit users, creating a simulated Reddit environment in which participants could choose which post to read and engage in. Participants were more likely to select and engage with opposition-framed posts than those framed around support.

What Catapano found most striking was how subtle the change in framing actually was.

All of the actual arguments were the same for both framings, Catapano explained. Simply changing the wording of the first sentence from ‘I support X’ to ‘I oppose Y’—where Y represented the other side of the issue—was enough to increase receptiveness, she says.

How receptive people are to messages is affected not only by the arguments themselves, Catapano added, but by something as small as a single word in how those arguments are introduced.

Here’s the takeaway: small changes in how we talk about our beliefs can have outsized effects on how others respond—an insight with clear relevance for holiday conversations.

Setting Boundaries and Protecting Your Health

Two UT Southwestern Medical Center faculty members also offered guidance in a Nov. 21, 2024 MedBlog article, “Boundaries, respect, keys to political discussions at holiday family gatherings.”

Cameron W. Davis, PhD, assistant professor of psychiatry, suggests the importance of setting  personal boundaries and identify “hot” and “cold” topics before attending the family gathering to reduce the likelihood of hostile exchanges.

Sarah Woods, PhD, associate professor and vice chair of research in the Department of Family and Community Medicine, notes that strained family relationships—often intensified by clashing opinions—can have serious short- and long-term health consequences. Her research findings indicate that strained family dynamics are linked to higher rates of chronic conditions.

According to Woods, stress triggers the release of cortisol, a hormone produced by the adrenal glands that acts as the body’s alarm system. Elevated cortisol levels can disrupt sleep, trigger headaches, increase inflammation, reduce pain tolerance, and cause shortness of breath.

Practical Do’s and Don’ts for Holiday Conversations

In their MedBlog, Drs. Davis and Woods offered the following practical advice to help keep Christmas dinner civil if political banter begins to heat up:

·         Communicate respectfully. Focus on presenting facts and ideas when discussing politics and avoid making personal attacks.

·         Set emotional boundaries.Pay close attention to your internal stress responses. Taking a deep breath before and during politically charged conversations can help you stay grounded.

·         Prepare in advance.No one knows how to push your buttons like a family member. Practice how you’ll respond to difficult relatives at the family gathering—and avoid pushing their buttons in return.

·         Focus on understanding others, not winning your point. Conflict is a natural part of relationships, and understanding this can help you develop the skills needed to address it.  effectively. Acknowledging another person’s perspective doesn’t weaken your own positions. The goal to reach is having respect for the other person’s views, not, victory.

According to Drs. Davis and Woods, being able to listen carefully is a useful skill when talking about political issues that make you uncomfortable.  If you decide to discuss politics at the Christmas dinner table, focus on truly hearing the other person rather than reacting impulsively. When responding, do it in a thoughtful way that reflect your values and understanding, they say.

The MedBlog authors also noted that it’s It’s helpful to identify an ally—someone you trust and feel safe with—where you can speak openly about your position on political issues that might come up at Christmas dinner or beyond.  This allows you to “practice authenticity, think openly, and experience non-judgement listing.” This doesn’t have to be someone who agrees with you politically, but rather someone who helps create a buffer zone of emotional safety, they say.

If conversations become heated, resist making impulsive decisions about cutting them off—or cutting family members or friends out of your life, recommend Drs. Davis and Woods, recommending:  Ask yourself: Is this a disagreement worth damaging a family relationship or friendship? Would quickly acting drain energy from other priorities right now?

Drs. Davis and Woods advise that if politics come up, don’t insist others agree with you or pressure them into debate. Step back from discussions that feel emotionally draining to you, you’re not obligated to participate. Politely declining, redirecting the topic, or gauging someone’s willingness to talk can prevent unnecessary tension.

Finally, having a plan can reduce stress, too. If you’re attending a gathering with a spouse or partner, get on the same page beforehand. Decide which topics are off-limits and how long you want to stay. Create a subtle signal—a hand gesture, a wink, or a touch on the shoulder—to defuse tension and awkward moments or cue your partner to step in.

A Final Note… Over the years, when I go to Christmas gatherings, my son, and I often differ on politics and other issues. When we don’t see eye to eye, I simply say, “Well, we can agree to disagree.” That usually settles the discussion once and for all.

Enjoy your Christmas gathering.