Dince the 1950s, longevity has progressed considerably in France, with fifteen years of life expectancy gained on average, and an unprecedented increase in the number of centenarians. This trend is largely explained by the quality of the medical care provided to the French and by the relevance of devoting a large share (nearly 12%) of our gross domestic product to health expenditure.
Nevertheless, it would be hasty to conclude that France is the European country where people age best. If the life expectancy at 65 years of the French is the longest, we are behind the Nordic countries in terms of longevity in good health. For example, if the Swedes aged 65 have a lower life expectancy than the French (on average, a year difference), 80% of the years they have left to live are spent in good health, against only 49% for the French. Moreover, a comparison between the physiological age and the civil age of seniors in the 70-75 age bracket confirms that the Swedes age better than the French.
This difference is not related to greater optimism or better living conditions observed in the Nordic countries. It is largely explained by the fact that the latter have implemented ambitious national policies of “ageing well”, by devoting a larger part of their wealth to it.
Counterproductive effects
Conversely, after several postponements of the “old age” reform project, French policy lacks a clear orientation. Indeed, the prevention of the loss of autonomy is the subject of various regional experiments, often heterogeneous, carried out by a large number of actors: university hospitals, pension and occupational health insurance funds, departmental councils , regional health agencies, patient associations, etc.
This lack of a coherent national strategy can have counterproductive effects. For example, while staying at home is a declared objective, our public aid often finances stays in institutions more generously than staying at home for seniors. In addition, the ministerial division made in May 2022, which led to the creation of a Ministry of Health and Prevention and a Ministry of Solidarity, Autonomy and People with Disabilities, artificially separates the prevention components and autonomy. And the lack of coordination between these two major ministries certainly explains why the major national prevention campaign launched in September 2022 targets three ages identified as “key” – 25 years old, 45 years old and 65 years old – but forgets 75 years old, an age nevertheless “hinge” for the risks of fragility.
You have 50.43% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.