study showedAging: Individual Challenge or Family Opportunity

Our recent conference on aging and families from a systems perspective provide some useful insights. We all are (hopefully) involved with aging because we live long enough! Of course, aging affects the family system’s individuals, no matter how old they are. What does a systems perspective offer? The short answer is – a LOT! Aging is an individual challenge AND its family challenge. The family can be a resource from a systems perspective.

For this post, I have used AI tools to summarize over ten hours of presentations. I have reviewed what was created and believe it represents useful content. As a communicator, my goal is to provide useful content. The information below is better than my analysis and synthesis would be. There are many significant points, and I encourage to get the recordings if you find these points interesting. Important points are like a meal replacement shake to a well-prepared home cook meal. It might be functional, but there’s a lot missing!

Dr. Conklin on Multiple Social Connections to Reduce Risk Factors of Heart Health

• “Loneliness” and “Social Isolation” Are Not the Same. A central argument of this presentation is the critical need to distinguish between functional and structural social ties. Dr. Conklin defines loneliness as a functional measure—the subjective feeling of a mismatch between expected and received social support. In contrast, social isolation is a structural measure, referring to the objective number and existence of relationships (e.g., marital status, living alone, network size). She argues that research and public discourse misuse these terms interchangeably.
• Current Research is Flawed by “Lumping” Data. Dr. Conklin critiques the existing scientific literature for “lumping” many distinct structural variables (like being widowed, being single, and being divorced) into a single, broad category like “not married,” or creating a single “social isolation index.” She contends that each of these factors is a unique risk factor and must be analyzed independently to understand its true effect on health.
• Social Relationships Affect Health Differently for Females and Males. This is the core finding of Dr. Conklin’s own research. By separating these structural factors, she found clear, gender-specific patterns.
  • For Men: Health risk factors (like blood pressure and waist circumference) were more strongly affected by close social ties, such as marital status. For example, becoming divorced was linked to the greatest increase in waist circumference for men.
  • For Women: Health risk factors were more strongly affected by broader social connections, particularly the number and diversity of their monthly social activities. For instance, women who consistently engaged in few social activities had a 20% higher odds of developing new-onset central obesity.
• Changes in Social Ties (Transitions) Are as Important as Static States. Dr. Conklin emphasized that social relationships are dynamic, not static. She argues that most research fails by only measuring social ties at a single point in time. Her longitudinal research shows that the transition from one state to another (e.g., becoming widowed, decreasing social activities) has its own distinct and significant health consequences that are missed in static studies.
• My Takeaway – Loneliness is the new smoking – My big takeaway on this presentation was that social isolation can be as bad as smoking with respect to health outcomes.

Amie Post – Friday –  Aging as a Family Process

It’s hard to do justice to Ms. Post’s detailed and nuanced presentation. Her knowledge of Bowen Theory is thorough, and she communicates the ideas well. She provides an excellent crash course in Bowen Theory.

• Aging is a family system process, not just an individual one. Bowen theory reframes aging by shifting the focus from “What is happening to this person?” to “What is going on in this family system?”. Symptoms in an aging individual are seen as part of a multi-generational process, rather than an isolated pathology.
• Symptoms are an expression of anxiety flowing through the family unit. The family is an interconnected emotional organism that syncs biologically. A symptom in one member, such as Ellen’s arthritis flare-up , expresses anxiety and tension present in the entire system, which then ripples outward in a cascade of reactions.
• “Differentiation of self” is the key to adaptive capacity. This concept measures the ability to remain a thoughtful self while remaining connected to others, especially under stress. Low differentiation leads to automatic, rigid reactions like fixed triangles. High differentiation allows for flexibility, objective thinking, and more considered, adaptive responses to challenges like aging.
• Chronic family anxiety has measurable biological consequences. The family’s emotional process is not just psychological; it directly affects physiology. Sustained activation of the stress response from chronic family anxiety (allostatic load) can lead to concrete changes in hormone levels, immune function, and gene expression.
• My Takeaway – it’s hard to always think systems, but that’s how we developed.

Saturday’s presentation continued her explanation of Bowen Theory.

Amie Post – Saturday – Engaging Family Systems Thinking to Promote Resiliency

Maybo Lui – Navigating Caregiving in a Collectivist Culture

Maybo Lui’s presentation of a family of Chinese heritage showed that other cultures have the same emotional processes at play. The CONTENT will be different, but triangles, chronic anxiety, multi-generation processes and level of differentiation are completely valid concepts. As are the other concepts. All cultures grew from the same evolutionary past and operate with the same biology. Culture will influence WHAT a person might be anxious about, but the anxiety still drives the emotional processes.

• Cultural systems create powerful, often unspoken, pressures on caregivers.
  • In Chinese culture, the combination of filial piety (a duty of absolute care), the avoidance of death as a taboo topic, and the premium on social harmony (avoiding conflict) often results in caregivers “quietly” assuming responsibilities without discussion. This leads to a lack of planning and a high risk of burnout, as seeking outside help may be resisted.
  • The presentation defines “fused caregiving” (over-involvement, self-neglect, acting from “guilt or fear”), “distant caregiving” (under-involvement, emotional disengagement to manage anxiety), and “differentiated caregiving” (maintaining emotional connection while acting on one’s own thoughtful values and balancing both one’s own needs and the parents’ needs). Both fused and distant patterns are described as “reactive” and lacking “thoughtfulness”.
• Differentiation can be framed within cultural values, not as a rejection of them.
  • The speaker aligns differentiation with the indigenous concept of “true filial piety” (acting with “wisdom and care” for the whole family), distinguishing it from “foolish filial piety” (“obedience with little thoughtfulness” that becomes harmful). This suggests differentiation is not about being “free of constraints” but about “how thoughtfully” one operates within them.
• Moving from reactivity to thoughtfulness is a non-linear process rooted in awareness.
  • The case study shows that change is a difficult “work in progress”. Anxiety predictably causes a “knee-jerk reaction” to “fall back” into default, reactive patterns. The primary tool for change is fostering self-observation and awareness, which allows the individual to “slow down”. Clinically, this means helping clients use calm periods to define their own principles and distinguish guilt-driven behaviour from “thoughtful conviction” before a crisis hits.
• My takeaway – Bowen Theory applies in different cultures. We all have the same biology. We all have families.