169
Absent US congresswoman has been dealing with ‘dementia issues’, family says
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 22 Dec 2024
169 points (97.2% liked)
politics
19246 readers
2548 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'd rather have mandatory cognitive tests. Start them at fifty, since some people develop early-onset dementia. Fail a cognitive test, you're out, regardless of age.
Nah. That's very arbitrary. An age is a definitive and objective number, "mental capacity" is so vague, and should not ever be a thing in political offices (that's up to voters to decide if they are "mentally capable" of doing the job). Using arbitray test like "mental capacity" are like those "literacy tests", its make the test administrators the de facto decision maket of who gets to be in office. Not a good precedent to set.
Rules should be clear and easy to implement & enforce. Example: 65 years old mandatory retirement. Simple, straightforward.
Besides cognitive issues, after 65 you probably won't experience the consequences your decisions in your lifetime.
Age is more arbitrary than is the result of a cognitive evaluation.
Cognitive evaluation looks like:
Bernie Sanders = Dementia
Trump = Totally fine and nothing wrong
-Sincerely, the totally unbiased psychologist
More arbitrary but less abusable. One is applied evenly to all people, regardless of people’s opinions or views. The other can be changed and manipulated in a way that knocks out political opponents.
I agree that cognitive ability is more important to me than a person’s age. I live with that observation every day with my parents. They are both around 80, and I would argue my mom is almost as sharp as she ever was; I have no concerns about her decision making. However, my dad is struggling more and more all the time; he’s shown decline for many years now and is at the point we’re not comfortable with him making many decisions or taking on complex tasks. A rule applied to one would not be equally appropriate for the other.
However, if we implement something, I would rather it be a rule that we can apply to all. I don’t trust the government to consistently and reasonably apply cognitive tests that don’t introduce bias.
Edit: autocorrect typo