![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
This subject has had a great deal of research done in recent years. I think this article would benefit from being restructured in a way that facilitates relevant content being added down the road. Removing the young adult section, and having it broken up into physical conginitive, cognitive and social development sections is I think where we should start. -- Narrico ( talk) 22:46, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
It's been a few months and I haven't heard back from anybody, so I am am gonna start moving forward with restructuring the page. I added a simplified form of the definition section to the lede paragraph, so I intend to remove that (please say something if you object, I want feedback). I also will remove the section on young adults and just leave links to the page on that subject. Narrico ( talk) 17:53, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
The information about the US Census either needs to be backed up by citations or to be deleted. None of the footnotes have any mention of this stated "fact". Violet desiree ( talk) 05:08, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Is it absolutely necessary to push the fucken political tripe? Want to talk about influence? Look at AARP. Businesses tend to hire younger people because they work cheaper. "Age discrimination" has been with us forever. The difference today is that we don't put our old folk out in the field to die in the cold. And they're a lot older these days too. (Not to mention that the average <a href=" http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/diet.fitness/03/16/obesity.longevity.ap/"> lifespan</a> in the USA is 77.6 years and that makes "middle age" 38.8 (+/- 5?).
The definitions are great. The politics need to be left at home where they can be argued to divorce.
Then again.... believe it or not, there is a whole world outside the USA, so the definition of "middle age" as being not old, not young, but somewhere in the middle, is more accurate than assigning a specific age, which would be different depending on where in the world you were. MR
35 is middle aged?!?!?! I'm in my late 20s, and 35 is NOT middle aged.
I'm responding to the sentence right above; I'm 37 & your right 35 is not middle age, 38 is. middle age ends at 43. old age starts at 65. in between 43-65 your old enough to know better, but still young enough to do it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.211.71.137 ( talk) 03:29, 20 August 2009 (UTC) >your right 35 is not middle age, 38 is. middle age ends at 43.
This is some bizarre thinking.
In response to the above poster,40 is middle aged except one of those new fangled ideas which say you're old when you're 30 or even between 25-30 ;) 59.178.22.64 15:09, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
The only people who say 30 is old are people who are still living in shit the Stone Age. That is not a new idea, that is a very old idea. Bjoh249 ( talk) 04:11, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
^That or they haven't (or only recently) completed puberty, or perhaps live somewhere with a life expectancy of about 45-50 (hence the "stone age" thing, I guess?). Funny thing is how there are many examples of people way back in time who have been documented to live past 70, and enough of them that I think rather than being a freak and underrecognized occurrence, it WAS a familiar picture of geriatric 'old age' in society, and the general concept might have remained more fairly static over time than we think (besides occuring in smaller numbers). And at the least it leads me to think that one's 30s, although not necessarily in the 'spring chicken' range, was still always closer to what 30s really SEEMS to be than any equivalent of a 'senior' person.
A lot of this talk comes from kids who seem genuinely convinced that life after 24 isn't something that can happen to them. I kind of blame the increased infantilization of youth, sheltering them from responsibility and naturally causing them to neglect the idea of a future life. There used to be more respect for adulthood. Theburning25 ( talk) 14:32, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
From a pre-hospital medical perspective, middle adulthood begins at age 41 and goes to 60. [1] Condorphoto ( talk) 18:57, 29 January 2018 (UTC)Condorphoto
References
The article said the following:
In many Western societies, this is seen to be the period of life in which a person is expected to have settled down in terms of their sense of identity and place in the world, be raising a family, and have established career stability.
Given that divorce is rife in Western societies and given that most people in Western societies do not see the significance of marriage (that is, it is no different to cohabitation) I think the paragraph above probably needs to be revised to removed.
-- Knowledge-is-power ( talk) 11:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
The quote you use here has not mentioned marriage so I do wonder at the validity of your point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.144.47 ( talk) 23:29, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Middle age starts at 40. It makes sense that way as after 40 is when the risk of certain diseases and heart attacks becomes greater. Also after 40 is when people start getting age-related eye problems. Also, after the age of 40 most people start contemplating life with a different point of view; more mature, experienced and cautious. Esvake ( talk) 00:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Wouldn't it make more sense to have 0-25 be young, 25-50 middle aged, and 50 plus being old? at least in the first world (where i suppose most people don't live) you live to be about 75. so thirds makes sense. Of course that is entirely unsubstantiated original research. (i think that's the right wiki term.)
(Unless we are talking about phases of adulthood, and then 20-40, 40-60, and 60-80 makes sense.)
This is too easy. The person above is right. On this planet we directly relate age to years and subsets of years. In the US of A our average life expectancy is 78, 75 is good also. To have a middle you need three parts. Therefore the first or young age would be around 0 through 26. Middle age is then 27 through 52 and third age or old age 53 on. An individual that just finished the fifth grade should be able to come to the same conclusion. You in your late 20's is also well into middle age.
if you are suggesting that a person lives until he is 75 then middle age should be around 39 because when you say middle age you are suggesting a person is in his middle cycle of his life which means divided by 2 becomes 39.
I am 25 and i am not too sure that when I am 27 that I would be in my middle cycle because really my adult life as not begun. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.68.21.77 ( talk) 05:52, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
I figure the revision is a baby boomer thing. A very large number of people didn't want to be considered middle aged at 40, so it was revised up to 45. Likewise, a large number now (the biggest generation in existence) doesn't want to be considered "old" at 60, so they have demanded and got another 5 years. How long until we hear 60 is the new 30?
Junk Science:
The following statement-- "Advanced maternal age increases the risk of a child being born with some disorders such as Down syndrome. Advanced paternal age sharply increases the risk of miscarriage and many birth defects, including Down syndrome, schizophrenia, autism, decreased intellectual capacity, and bipolar disorder"-- is complete and utter nonsense. A famous example of a child born to "older parents" would be Rod Roddenberry, son of Star Trek founder Gene Roddenberry and Majel Roddenberry who were aged 53 and 41, respectively. As far as I know Mr. Roddenberry hasn't suffered any mental defects. I'm sure if you do a little research you can find more examples. My father was 51 and my mother was 39 when I was born. I took advanced placement classes in highschool and now have a Master of Science degree. I'm also a genealogist and study family histories. My maternal grandmother had her last child (my uncle) at age 43. Traditionally, familes in the United States have consisted of 11 to 18 children, in which case, many of the last children were born to female parents 35-49 with the male parent well into his sixties or even older. As of this writing, I have not found even one case of autism, decreased intellectual capacity or down syndrome. If you don't believe me then there are plenty of genalogical records available for you to research. A friend of mine has a child that has autism (both he and his wife are 29 and 25 respectively. My neighbors are in their mid-20's and they had a down syndrome child. I can't add any of this to the article because this consists of personal experience and my own genealogical research. (Which has been backed by many other researchers.) And, yes, observation and historical data are considered a valid part of the scientific method. Scientificly there are numerous factors that contribute to birth defects. The way this article is written makes it seem like the age of the parents are the major cause when in fact if the age of the parents are a factor, then it is an extremely small one. Just becuase someone waits until middle age to have children does not automaticly spell doom for thier children.
Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.154.39.194 ( talk) 21:00, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Exactly. Anything published in a Wikipedia article must be verified. As a scientist, you would know that the fact that some younger parents have children with Autism and Down Syndrome and some older parents have children who do NOT have Autism and Down Syndrome is not sufficient evidence that the likelihood of having a baby with either of these conditions increases (or does not increase) with age.
I don't think the article as it is written gives the impression that "the age of the parents are (sic) the major cause" of these conditions, nor does it give the impression that women can't have children in middle age. It's just a dispassionate statement of fact, and whether it makes anyone feel bad is somewhat beside the point. There are many other places online and elsewhere to find encouragement and advice. Sadiemonster ( talk) 08:23, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
25 is not middle aged and 50 is not old age. I think that middle age is about from 45 to 60.-- 85.76.25.116 ( talk) 23:04, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
There's good sourcing posted and stating right at the beginning of the article that it normally starts at 45, and the third age starts at 65. Merriam Webster. The plural form (s) is also more correct. 151.68.0.26 ( talk) 00:58, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
The OP wrote this back in 2008, I think a lot of things have changed since then. “Middle age” is an offensive term that needs to go away, but as long as it exists I think it can be revised upward. More people are living past 100 than ever before. Bjoh249 ( talk) 19:12, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
This article is far too dour in its listing and explication of the characteristics of middle age. I don't mean this in the sense that I am contesting what is thus far included--most of the material seems consensus-based and accurate. However, there are also biological, sociocultural, and socioeconomic aspects of middle age which are far more positive and, thus far, have not made their way into the section. I'll give a few examples:
These are only examples. Yes, obviously, citations would need to be found. Yes, obviously, there are others. My only point is that the article comes across as far too negative. It's not inaccurate, but it is biased in the sense of what is included vs. what is excluded. Can we try to improve it? Does anyone ever actually read the discussions on wikipedia anymore if the topic doesn't involve an edit war or a request for deletion? Sigh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.135.151.53 ( talk) 14:21, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
So agreed more positives lol Nlivataye ( talk) 14:25, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
I've reverted the first sentence of the article to an older version, mainly because the older definition doesn't mention any particular age range. I think this is important because:
a) There doesn't appear to be any universally agreed age range
b) Several age ranges are mentioned (with their sources) later in the article. If needs be the Macmillan dictionary definition could be added there.
c) Putting dates in the first sentence leaves it rather open to vandalism - because the reference was not online, the date range had been changed a couple of times and for most people it's not possible to easily check the reference. When I first viewed this page, middle age had been defined as between 22 and 69, and the page had been like that for nine days.
TimTim ( talk) 08:46, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
It is irrelevant and biased toward a particular family structure — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.173.28.106 ( talk) 23:11, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Middle age. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 15:10, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Some of the external links and references need to be updated. Some are outdated and some of the links are broken or lead to a site that has been taken down. Do you guys have any sites or sources that you like to go to find relevant information? Kimmigirl ( talk) 03:37, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Sorry all - the page was locked otherwise I'd have edited myself. The reference to Erikson's theory of Psychosocial Development has been inaccurately applied in this article.
I would suggest changing the article as such:
Cognitive characteristics
[Delete first sentence] Persons in middle adulthood or middle age may have some cognitive loss. This loss usually remains unnoticeable because life experiences and strategies are developed to compensate for any decrease in mental abilities.[7] Social and personality characteristics
Marital satisfaction remains but other family relationships can be more difficult. Career satisfaction focuses more on inner satisfaction and contentedness and less on ambition and the desire to "advance".[8] Even so, career changes often can occur. Middle adulthood or middle age can be a time when a person re-examines their life by taking stock, and evaluating their accomplishments. Morality may change and become more conscious.[citation needed] The perception that those in this stage of development of life undergo a "mid-life" crisis is largely false, however by Erik Erikson's theory of Psychosocial Development, middle age can be a stage of role transition, as children grow up and retirement looms. According to his theory, the middle aged adult successfully navigates this stage of life, termed 'Generativity vs Stagnation', by finding new roles, and new purpose, to keep life fulfilling. Furthermore, Erikson postulated that focus shifts from developing intimacy with a partner in younger adulthood, to care of children and grandchildren. Personality characteristics remain stable throughout this period.[1] The relationships in middle adulthood may continue to evolve into connections that are stable.[8] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.220.123.242 ( talk) 09:57, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
One further small problem with the reference to Erikson as it now stands (02 July 2020). The article says, "Merriam-Webster lists middle age from about 45 to 64,[3] while prominent psychologist Erik Erikson saw it starting a little earlier and defines middle adulthood as between 55 and 65." This makes no sense - if Erikson's definition starts at age 55, then it is hardly "earlier" that the Merriam-Webster definition which starts at 45. I don't know which the word "earlier" should be replaced with "later" or some other change needs making. I'm not familiar with the debate - I was just trying to get some information about the definition of "middle age". Could someone who does know what this means please correct this sentence? Jorvikian ( talk) 20:26, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
More definitions start with and include 40 up to 44. Even Erikson's definition includes 40. If it were me, I'd say 40+ is full middle age, and 35-40 is the transition into it. Same with 60-65 for old age.
Not to mention all the effects of aging in your early 40s. That's definitely middle age. Schwarbage ( talk) 06:25, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
What do you think? Schwarbage ( talk) 15:13, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
The sources that speak about 'middle age' (middle adulthood) and when it begins are inconsistent and range from 30 [5] to 50 [6] and everywhere in between.
The lead is wrong to state a definition as a "general consensus" when there is no general consensus and there are sources that say as much [7]. The changes in the article were the work of one editor who seems to be obsessively editing age-related articles. Jonathan f1 ( talk) 04:57, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
Middle age today starts at around 45, not 40, 40 is too young and most sources at the beginning prove this. User 2601:246:5780:BEC0:1E09:DB29:2965:9D (or IP similars used by them) needs to be held accountable for the vandalism and disruption they're causing (with no counteredit to disprove the fact) and that led to the unproductive, useless and damaging protection of the page more than once in just a few days. 151.82.79.178 ( talk) 10:44, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Middle age starts at ages 56-60. This has been and still is the age range and definition of it. 100.34.234.175 ( talk) 21:39, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
This subject has had a great deal of research done in recent years. I think this article would benefit from being restructured in a way that facilitates relevant content being added down the road. Removing the young adult section, and having it broken up into physical conginitive, cognitive and social development sections is I think where we should start. -- Narrico ( talk) 22:46, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
It's been a few months and I haven't heard back from anybody, so I am am gonna start moving forward with restructuring the page. I added a simplified form of the definition section to the lede paragraph, so I intend to remove that (please say something if you object, I want feedback). I also will remove the section on young adults and just leave links to the page on that subject. Narrico ( talk) 17:53, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
The information about the US Census either needs to be backed up by citations or to be deleted. None of the footnotes have any mention of this stated "fact". Violet desiree ( talk) 05:08, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Is it absolutely necessary to push the fucken political tripe? Want to talk about influence? Look at AARP. Businesses tend to hire younger people because they work cheaper. "Age discrimination" has been with us forever. The difference today is that we don't put our old folk out in the field to die in the cold. And they're a lot older these days too. (Not to mention that the average <a href=" http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/diet.fitness/03/16/obesity.longevity.ap/"> lifespan</a> in the USA is 77.6 years and that makes "middle age" 38.8 (+/- 5?).
The definitions are great. The politics need to be left at home where they can be argued to divorce.
Then again.... believe it or not, there is a whole world outside the USA, so the definition of "middle age" as being not old, not young, but somewhere in the middle, is more accurate than assigning a specific age, which would be different depending on where in the world you were. MR
35 is middle aged?!?!?! I'm in my late 20s, and 35 is NOT middle aged.
I'm responding to the sentence right above; I'm 37 & your right 35 is not middle age, 38 is. middle age ends at 43. old age starts at 65. in between 43-65 your old enough to know better, but still young enough to do it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.211.71.137 ( talk) 03:29, 20 August 2009 (UTC) >your right 35 is not middle age, 38 is. middle age ends at 43.
This is some bizarre thinking.
In response to the above poster,40 is middle aged except one of those new fangled ideas which say you're old when you're 30 or even between 25-30 ;) 59.178.22.64 15:09, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
The only people who say 30 is old are people who are still living in shit the Stone Age. That is not a new idea, that is a very old idea. Bjoh249 ( talk) 04:11, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
^That or they haven't (or only recently) completed puberty, or perhaps live somewhere with a life expectancy of about 45-50 (hence the "stone age" thing, I guess?). Funny thing is how there are many examples of people way back in time who have been documented to live past 70, and enough of them that I think rather than being a freak and underrecognized occurrence, it WAS a familiar picture of geriatric 'old age' in society, and the general concept might have remained more fairly static over time than we think (besides occuring in smaller numbers). And at the least it leads me to think that one's 30s, although not necessarily in the 'spring chicken' range, was still always closer to what 30s really SEEMS to be than any equivalent of a 'senior' person.
A lot of this talk comes from kids who seem genuinely convinced that life after 24 isn't something that can happen to them. I kind of blame the increased infantilization of youth, sheltering them from responsibility and naturally causing them to neglect the idea of a future life. There used to be more respect for adulthood. Theburning25 ( talk) 14:32, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
From a pre-hospital medical perspective, middle adulthood begins at age 41 and goes to 60. [1] Condorphoto ( talk) 18:57, 29 January 2018 (UTC)Condorphoto
References
The article said the following:
In many Western societies, this is seen to be the period of life in which a person is expected to have settled down in terms of their sense of identity and place in the world, be raising a family, and have established career stability.
Given that divorce is rife in Western societies and given that most people in Western societies do not see the significance of marriage (that is, it is no different to cohabitation) I think the paragraph above probably needs to be revised to removed.
-- Knowledge-is-power ( talk) 11:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
The quote you use here has not mentioned marriage so I do wonder at the validity of your point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.144.47 ( talk) 23:29, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Middle age starts at 40. It makes sense that way as after 40 is when the risk of certain diseases and heart attacks becomes greater. Also after 40 is when people start getting age-related eye problems. Also, after the age of 40 most people start contemplating life with a different point of view; more mature, experienced and cautious. Esvake ( talk) 00:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Wouldn't it make more sense to have 0-25 be young, 25-50 middle aged, and 50 plus being old? at least in the first world (where i suppose most people don't live) you live to be about 75. so thirds makes sense. Of course that is entirely unsubstantiated original research. (i think that's the right wiki term.)
(Unless we are talking about phases of adulthood, and then 20-40, 40-60, and 60-80 makes sense.)
This is too easy. The person above is right. On this planet we directly relate age to years and subsets of years. In the US of A our average life expectancy is 78, 75 is good also. To have a middle you need three parts. Therefore the first or young age would be around 0 through 26. Middle age is then 27 through 52 and third age or old age 53 on. An individual that just finished the fifth grade should be able to come to the same conclusion. You in your late 20's is also well into middle age.
if you are suggesting that a person lives until he is 75 then middle age should be around 39 because when you say middle age you are suggesting a person is in his middle cycle of his life which means divided by 2 becomes 39.
I am 25 and i am not too sure that when I am 27 that I would be in my middle cycle because really my adult life as not begun. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.68.21.77 ( talk) 05:52, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
I figure the revision is a baby boomer thing. A very large number of people didn't want to be considered middle aged at 40, so it was revised up to 45. Likewise, a large number now (the biggest generation in existence) doesn't want to be considered "old" at 60, so they have demanded and got another 5 years. How long until we hear 60 is the new 30?
Junk Science:
The following statement-- "Advanced maternal age increases the risk of a child being born with some disorders such as Down syndrome. Advanced paternal age sharply increases the risk of miscarriage and many birth defects, including Down syndrome, schizophrenia, autism, decreased intellectual capacity, and bipolar disorder"-- is complete and utter nonsense. A famous example of a child born to "older parents" would be Rod Roddenberry, son of Star Trek founder Gene Roddenberry and Majel Roddenberry who were aged 53 and 41, respectively. As far as I know Mr. Roddenberry hasn't suffered any mental defects. I'm sure if you do a little research you can find more examples. My father was 51 and my mother was 39 when I was born. I took advanced placement classes in highschool and now have a Master of Science degree. I'm also a genealogist and study family histories. My maternal grandmother had her last child (my uncle) at age 43. Traditionally, familes in the United States have consisted of 11 to 18 children, in which case, many of the last children were born to female parents 35-49 with the male parent well into his sixties or even older. As of this writing, I have not found even one case of autism, decreased intellectual capacity or down syndrome. If you don't believe me then there are plenty of genalogical records available for you to research. A friend of mine has a child that has autism (both he and his wife are 29 and 25 respectively. My neighbors are in their mid-20's and they had a down syndrome child. I can't add any of this to the article because this consists of personal experience and my own genealogical research. (Which has been backed by many other researchers.) And, yes, observation and historical data are considered a valid part of the scientific method. Scientificly there are numerous factors that contribute to birth defects. The way this article is written makes it seem like the age of the parents are the major cause when in fact if the age of the parents are a factor, then it is an extremely small one. Just becuase someone waits until middle age to have children does not automaticly spell doom for thier children.
Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.154.39.194 ( talk) 21:00, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Exactly. Anything published in a Wikipedia article must be verified. As a scientist, you would know that the fact that some younger parents have children with Autism and Down Syndrome and some older parents have children who do NOT have Autism and Down Syndrome is not sufficient evidence that the likelihood of having a baby with either of these conditions increases (or does not increase) with age.
I don't think the article as it is written gives the impression that "the age of the parents are (sic) the major cause" of these conditions, nor does it give the impression that women can't have children in middle age. It's just a dispassionate statement of fact, and whether it makes anyone feel bad is somewhat beside the point. There are many other places online and elsewhere to find encouragement and advice. Sadiemonster ( talk) 08:23, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
25 is not middle aged and 50 is not old age. I think that middle age is about from 45 to 60.-- 85.76.25.116 ( talk) 23:04, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
There's good sourcing posted and stating right at the beginning of the article that it normally starts at 45, and the third age starts at 65. Merriam Webster. The plural form (s) is also more correct. 151.68.0.26 ( talk) 00:58, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
The OP wrote this back in 2008, I think a lot of things have changed since then. “Middle age” is an offensive term that needs to go away, but as long as it exists I think it can be revised upward. More people are living past 100 than ever before. Bjoh249 ( talk) 19:12, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
This article is far too dour in its listing and explication of the characteristics of middle age. I don't mean this in the sense that I am contesting what is thus far included--most of the material seems consensus-based and accurate. However, there are also biological, sociocultural, and socioeconomic aspects of middle age which are far more positive and, thus far, have not made their way into the section. I'll give a few examples:
These are only examples. Yes, obviously, citations would need to be found. Yes, obviously, there are others. My only point is that the article comes across as far too negative. It's not inaccurate, but it is biased in the sense of what is included vs. what is excluded. Can we try to improve it? Does anyone ever actually read the discussions on wikipedia anymore if the topic doesn't involve an edit war or a request for deletion? Sigh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.135.151.53 ( talk) 14:21, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
So agreed more positives lol Nlivataye ( talk) 14:25, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
I've reverted the first sentence of the article to an older version, mainly because the older definition doesn't mention any particular age range. I think this is important because:
a) There doesn't appear to be any universally agreed age range
b) Several age ranges are mentioned (with their sources) later in the article. If needs be the Macmillan dictionary definition could be added there.
c) Putting dates in the first sentence leaves it rather open to vandalism - because the reference was not online, the date range had been changed a couple of times and for most people it's not possible to easily check the reference. When I first viewed this page, middle age had been defined as between 22 and 69, and the page had been like that for nine days.
TimTim ( talk) 08:46, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
It is irrelevant and biased toward a particular family structure — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.173.28.106 ( talk) 23:11, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Middle age. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 15:10, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Some of the external links and references need to be updated. Some are outdated and some of the links are broken or lead to a site that has been taken down. Do you guys have any sites or sources that you like to go to find relevant information? Kimmigirl ( talk) 03:37, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Sorry all - the page was locked otherwise I'd have edited myself. The reference to Erikson's theory of Psychosocial Development has been inaccurately applied in this article.
I would suggest changing the article as such:
Cognitive characteristics
[Delete first sentence] Persons in middle adulthood or middle age may have some cognitive loss. This loss usually remains unnoticeable because life experiences and strategies are developed to compensate for any decrease in mental abilities.[7] Social and personality characteristics
Marital satisfaction remains but other family relationships can be more difficult. Career satisfaction focuses more on inner satisfaction and contentedness and less on ambition and the desire to "advance".[8] Even so, career changes often can occur. Middle adulthood or middle age can be a time when a person re-examines their life by taking stock, and evaluating their accomplishments. Morality may change and become more conscious.[citation needed] The perception that those in this stage of development of life undergo a "mid-life" crisis is largely false, however by Erik Erikson's theory of Psychosocial Development, middle age can be a stage of role transition, as children grow up and retirement looms. According to his theory, the middle aged adult successfully navigates this stage of life, termed 'Generativity vs Stagnation', by finding new roles, and new purpose, to keep life fulfilling. Furthermore, Erikson postulated that focus shifts from developing intimacy with a partner in younger adulthood, to care of children and grandchildren. Personality characteristics remain stable throughout this period.[1] The relationships in middle adulthood may continue to evolve into connections that are stable.[8] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.220.123.242 ( talk) 09:57, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
One further small problem with the reference to Erikson as it now stands (02 July 2020). The article says, "Merriam-Webster lists middle age from about 45 to 64,[3] while prominent psychologist Erik Erikson saw it starting a little earlier and defines middle adulthood as between 55 and 65." This makes no sense - if Erikson's definition starts at age 55, then it is hardly "earlier" that the Merriam-Webster definition which starts at 45. I don't know which the word "earlier" should be replaced with "later" or some other change needs making. I'm not familiar with the debate - I was just trying to get some information about the definition of "middle age". Could someone who does know what this means please correct this sentence? Jorvikian ( talk) 20:26, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
More definitions start with and include 40 up to 44. Even Erikson's definition includes 40. If it were me, I'd say 40+ is full middle age, and 35-40 is the transition into it. Same with 60-65 for old age.
Not to mention all the effects of aging in your early 40s. That's definitely middle age. Schwarbage ( talk) 06:25, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
What do you think? Schwarbage ( talk) 15:13, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
The sources that speak about 'middle age' (middle adulthood) and when it begins are inconsistent and range from 30 [5] to 50 [6] and everywhere in between.
The lead is wrong to state a definition as a "general consensus" when there is no general consensus and there are sources that say as much [7]. The changes in the article were the work of one editor who seems to be obsessively editing age-related articles. Jonathan f1 ( talk) 04:57, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
Middle age today starts at around 45, not 40, 40 is too young and most sources at the beginning prove this. User 2601:246:5780:BEC0:1E09:DB29:2965:9D (or IP similars used by them) needs to be held accountable for the vandalism and disruption they're causing (with no counteredit to disprove the fact) and that led to the unproductive, useless and damaging protection of the page more than once in just a few days. 151.82.79.178 ( talk) 10:44, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Middle age starts at ages 56-60. This has been and still is the age range and definition of it. 100.34.234.175 ( talk) 21:39, 13 January 2024 (UTC)