Rep. Carson’s Bill Challenges Ageist Language in Rhode Island Statutes

Published on March 2, 2026

During the 93rd Legislative Session, a law enacted in Massachusetts caught the attention of Lauren H. Carson (D-Dist. 75, Newport), who chairs the House Study Commission on Services for Older Rhode Islanders (HSCORI). Carson was convinced of the need to confront ageism in the state’s statutes. She understood the importance of how Rhode Island lawmakers talk about aging.

On Jan. 9, 2025, Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey signed Senate Bill S. 3006, “An Act Renaming the Executive Office of Elder Affairs to the Executive Office of Aging and Independence,” into law. Sponsored by Joan B. Lovely (D–Second Essex), the measure formally changed the name of the Executive Office of Elder Affairs to the Executive Office of Aging & Independence to better reflect the agency’s mission of supporting older adults in maintaining independence and dignity.

Beyond the name change, the law sought to modernize statutory language and reduce the stigma often associated with aging. It replaced outdated terms such as “elder,” “elderly person(s),” and “handicapped” throughout state law with more respectful and person-centered language, including “older adult(s)” and “adult with a disability.”

Carson believed that Massachusetts’ move to systematically remove ageist language from state law was a public policy Rhode Island could follow.

A Rhode Island Response

More than a year later, on Feb. 5, 2026, Carson introduced similar legislation, H. 7496, aimed at reviewing state statutes to identify negative or outdated references to older Rhode Islanders — including terms such as “elders” and “elderly person(s)” — while strengthening advocacy for older adults.  At press time, Sen. Victoria Gu (D-Dist. 38, Westerly, Charlestown, South Kingston) plans to introduce the Senate version of this bill.

Carson’s special legislative commission is identifying ways to improve services and maximize resources available to older Rhode Islanders in the face of an expected surge in that population over the next 15 years. Over the more than two years the commission has been meeting, Carson has noted that, with life expectancy having increased over the decades, people over 60 are not all living lifestyles that could be described as “elderly,” and they certainly do not appreciate being labeled as such.

The legislative proposal, referred to the House State Government & Elections Committee, would initiate a review of state laws for references to “elders” and “elderly person(s)” and enable the drafting of legislation next year to replace those terms with the phrase “older adults.”

“Words matter. When we apply labels to people, we are telling them and everyone else how we think of them, what we expect of them. Many people over 60, 65 or 70 are still working like any other adults. They are contributing to their communities, they are active, and they simply are not what we think of when we hear the word ‘elderly.’ They don’t want to be called ‘senior citizens,’” Carson said in a statement announcing the introduction of H. 7496. “Being older than middle age doesn’t mean you are elderly. Our language should better reflect that this is a huge swath of our population that includes a wide range of ages, abilities and lifestyles. They aren’t all elderly.”

Her legislation also specifies that references to “handicapped” and “disabled” in the parts of the General Laws relating to older adults be replaced with the term “adult person(s) with disabilities.”

Carson’s bill, which also includes changes designed to give older Rhode Islanders a seat at the table in state planning and to better empower a panel on long-term care, stems from the work of the commission she chairs to study services provided to older Rhode Islanders.

The legislative proposal makes two additional changes to address issues identified during the commission’s work.

It adds a representative from a statewide aging advocacy organization as a member of the State Planning Council and specifies that the new member must be at least 60 years old. The purpose of the change is to sharpen the state’s focus on issues affecting older Rhode Islanders by ensuring their interests are represented in state planning, helping to prepare and direct resources appropriately as the state’s 60-plus population grows. Currently, more than 240,000 Rhode Islanders are age 60 or older. That number is expected to increase to nearly 265,000 by 2040.

The legislation also makes it easier for the Long-Term Care Coordinating Council to reach a quorum. With 33 members — many of whom are busy leaders of state agencies, organizations or businesses — the panel at times struggles to meet quorum requirements. The bill would allow 12 members to constitute a quorum. The change is supported by Lt. Gov. Sabina Matos, who chairs the council.

Talking About Ageism, Language and Older Adults

At a two-hour HSCORI public meeting held Sept. 18, 2024, at the Pilgrim Senior Center in Warwick, Dr. Philip Clark, director of University of Rhode Island’ Program of Gerontology and Jim Connell, executive director of Age-Friendly Rhode Island, spoke about the negative impact of ageism and the importance of reframing aging using more positive language. It was one of three such meetings held “on the road” in different communities — Newport, Warwick and South Kingstown — to increase public visibility and engagement.

During his 34-minute presentation, Clark argued that language shapes perception and policy, and that the pervasive use of ageist language and stereotypes has detrimental health and social consequences for older adults. Ageism is a significant public health problem, he said, citing research by Dr. Becca Levy of Yale University indicating that negative self-perceptions of aging can shorten one’s lifespan by as much as seven years.

“How we talk about aging matters and particularly ageism language and “older adults.” And the operative word here is older adults. That is the term in the field of gerontology that has become standard language,” says Clark.  He  advocated using the term “older adults” instead of labels such as “seniors” or “the elderly,” which often carry negative connotations.

“Ageism is the last of the ‘ism’s’ to be recognized and confronted as discriminatory.  Even older adults themselves fall victim to ageist attitudes and believes,” says Clark.  He identified veiled ageism — including patronizing language such as “dear” or “sweetie” and infantilizing humor — that reinforces negative stereotypes about aging.

Clark stressed the vast diversity within the older population, repeating the mantra, “If you’ve seen one older person, you have seen one older person.” He warned against policies that treat this diverse group as a monolith.

“Older adults are more unique than any other age group,” Clark said, noting that they have had a lifetime to become who they are. Their needs, abilities and desires vary widely, and policy must reflect this diversity rather than relying on one-size-fits-all solutions.

“We must analyze the meaning of words and the wording of meanings,” Clark added, urging policymakers to critically examine language and underlying assumptions in policies and programs to ensure they are grounded in accurate data and reflect values of independence and dignity rather than ageist bias.

During Q&A, Commissioner Maria Cimini, Director of the state’s Office of Healthy Aging, asked Clark how best to balance inclusive language with recognition of each older adult’s unique identity. “When I go into different communities, like the Center for Southeast Asians, they specifically use the word ‘elder,’” she said. “Not ‘older adult.’”

Clark responded, “If you’re in a community where ‘elder’ carries a sense of respect, appreciation, and value, you obviously don’t want to impose your white, middle-class values on that group.”

“We use catastrophic language. It makes the problem seem unsolvable and it makes it very hard for us to be successful in our advocacy,” said Commissioner Catherine Taylor, state director of AARP Rhode Island, reinforcing Clark’s testimony by explaining how negative framing can undermine efforts to secure legislative support for aging-related issues.

“So, to use the right language is really important to the success of our work in getting things through,” adds Taylor.

Following Clark’s presentation, Connell argued that the common negative narrative of aging is incomplete and fails to account for the many older adults who are active, working and seeking new opportunities.

According to Connell, 71% of Americans aged 65 and older say the best time of their lives is right now or still ahead of them. He also cited a recent Harris Poll indicating that 83% of U.S. adults 65 and older feel it is more important to feel useful than youthful in retirement.

Connell introduced the concept of “middle essence” to describe the period from ages 60 to 80, highlighting it as a time for new careers, enrichment and purpose. He emphasized the power of personal narratives and lived experience to counter the societal view of aging as a period of frailty and decline.

Personal stories are a powerful tool for dismantling the dominant negative narrative of aging, Connell said. He characterized the growing older population not as a problem to be solved, but as a “longevity boom” full of potential for personal growth, continued work and community contribution — one that requires intentional, age-friendly planning.

Connell noted that society has gained 30 years of life expectancy since the mid-20th century and said this “longevity boom” must be factored into planning. He warned that “othering” — assuming all members of a group are the same — is the “absolute enemy” of effective planning for an aging population.

Connell concluded by saying: “So this Commission and indeed all of us were well positioned to have the power to change the aging narrative and he use of ageist language in our state. It’s important that lived experience be woven into everything we do.  Please keep telling your stories. It’s really, really important.”

Meanwhile, at the same public commission meeting, House Speaker K. Joseph Shekarchi (D-Dist. 23, Warwick) reported on several recent accomplishments, including passage of accessory dwelling unit (ADU) legislation, a law allowing cameras in nursing home rooms, an increased tax exemption for Social Security income and a state-level cap on insulin costs. He also highlighted a $120 million housing bond question that appeared on the November ballot, calling it a critical opportunity to fund affordable housing for older adults.

Shekarchi further noted the creation of a Senate commission to explore establishing a new medical school in Rhode Island as a long-term strategy to address the state’s primary care physician shortage. He also referenced Gov. McKee’s Healthcare Systems Planning Cabinet as another effort to address systemic issues, including primary care access and long-term care planning.

To watch HSCORI’s Sept. 9, 2024 public meeting, go to  https://capitoltvri.cablecast.tv/show/10590.

___