COMM 350

Fostering intergenerational interaction:

communication between the old and the young

By: Toby P. Newstead

Our elders are the keepers of our heritage and tradition. And, our children are our
future. Not so long ago these two age groups had a special relationship; our elders
instructed our children in culture, social acceptances, and wisdom. However, with
the recent increase in mobility and the fragmentation of the extended family, there
is an ever-increasing communication gap between our elders and our children.
Cross-generational interaction within the family is becoming less common. It is
becoming more common for the very young and the very old to be cared for outside
the home in professional care facilities that further exacerbate the generational
communication gap. This paper will demonstrate that the relationships that have
been lost due to the fragmentation of our families can be recreated through
community programs, school programs, and innovative care facilities, and how
carefully fostered cross-generational interpersonal communication benefits both age
groups and the community at large.1

FAMILIES ARE CHANGING – OUTLINING THE PROBLEM

A multi-generational household offers the opportunity to distribute the care of

children among many adults; a live-in grandmother is present to help care for her
grandchildren. A multi-generation household also offers the opportunity to distribute
the care of aging adults; a live-in adult grandchild is present to help care for his
aging grandfather. In the 1920s about 50% of families in the US included at least
one extra adult, such as a grandparent, or older aunt or uncle. Today it is estimated
that only about 3.5% of families have an extra adult living under the same roof

1
In referring to “our families” this paper, and the author, refer to western, primarily North American families.
 Newstead 2

(Powell & Arquitt, 2001, p.421). The changing family composition is resulting in less
contact, and less interpersonal communication between our elders and our young
children.

Our families have become nuclear. Our families have also become mobile. It
is now common for the nuclear family to uproot from where previous generations
have lived in order to follow careers, opportunity, and adventure across countries
and continents. It is less common to live in close proximity to ones extended family
(Chamberlain, et a., 1994). This is a striking point, considering that proximity is the
single most important factor in determining the depth and positivity of interpersonal
relationships between grandparents and their grandchildren (Folwell & Grant, 2006,
p. 10). The mobility of our modern families is increasing the communication gap
between our elders and our children.

Our families move around more than they used to, they also fragment more
than they used to. Divorce rates are increasing, and divorce can result in less
communication between children and their grandparents (Folwell & Grant, 2006).
Divorce can also mean triple duty for single parents. Currently in North America
more than half of all mothers work outside the home (Cornille, 2007, p. 631). In
addition to holding down a job, it is estimated that the average woman will care for
her own children for 17 years, and will care for her parents for 18 years
(Chamberlain, et al, 1994, p.194). Not so long ago, before our families moved so
often and so far, and before it was so common for our families to disintegrate,
elders in the extended family would contribute to the care of young children, and
grandchildren would contribute the care of their elderly grandparents. As it is, many
of our children and elders now receive the care they need in professional, age
specific care facilities, where valuable cross-generation interpersonal
communication is absent.

COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE YOUNG AND THE OLD

Cross-generational communication is complicated. Kuehne and Collins (1997)

identify three main hurtles to interpersonal communication between the very young
and the very old. The first is stereotypes and stigmas; negative stereotypes about
 Newstead 3

grouchy old people, or delinquent youth often stand in the way of open
interpersonal communication between young and old. The second is a difference in
interaction patterns. Because youth are often not brought up with elders in
proximity they are not used to the way elders tend to interact, and vice versa. A
young person may be comfortable talking while playing a videogame and munching
on a snack, but this may come across as rude to the elder with whom the youth is
attempting to communicate. The third hurtle to intergenerational interpersonal
communication, as identified by Kuehne and Collins, is an unusual power balance. It
is inherent in most cultures that elders have a certain power and authority that
young children do not. When elders and children that do not have a previous
relationship attempt to communicate there is an underlying unbalanced power
distribution; the elder has more power than the child, but the extent of the elder’s
power, their role as a disciplinarian, for example, is not clearly defined (Kuehne &
Collins, 1997). These three hurtles to cross-generational communication require
practice to overcome. Only children and elders that communicate across
generations often will become comfortable and adept at doing so.

The negative stereotypes identified by Kuehne and Collins as the first hurtle
to interpersonal communication between the elderly and the young are formed at a
very early age (Chamberlain, et al.). But, where interpersonal relationships are
fostered between these two age groups, negative stereotypes decrease. The
patterns of communication set in the early years of a child’s life will stay with him. If
a child is comfortable talking to an older person, he is more likely to talk to older
people in the future and to become ever more comfortable doing so. The opposite is
also true; if a child is not comfortable talking to an older person, he will usually
become less comfortable in cross-generation communication and more likely to
avoid such interactions in the future (McCann, et al., 2005).

People of differing age groups communicate differently, and “young

Americans clearly see three separate age groups, and view them as having different
boundaries” (McCann, et al., 2005, p. 304). We are divided into distinct age groups,
and communication across these age groups is not easy unless it is practiced, but
all too often, cross-generational communication is non-existent. Many children are
growing up with minimal exposure to other generations, and many of the older
members of our communities are isolated by age as well (Conyers, 1996). This is
 Newstead 4

due to the combination of mobility and family fragmentation, and to age-specific

care facilities. Childcare programs and centres, senior citizens centres, and youth
services – programs designed to provide the care that the extended family no
longer can, are age specific, and so cross-generational communication is absent
(Powell & Arquitt, 1978). “Our young and old live in separate worlds” (Chamberlain,
et al., 1994, p. 196).

Age separation, and the resulting communication gap between our young and
our old, has negative consequences. Our elders, holders of our traditions, have little
opportunity to pass their wisdom on to our children, our future. Chamberlain, et al.,
suggest “elders’ decline in life satisfaction and younger people’s increased belief in
negative stereotypes about aging seem to be associated with the trend towards age
separation” (Chamberlain, et al., 1994, p. 195). The combination of family mobility
and family fragmentation has created two things: a need for out-of-home care
services, and an exaggerated communication gap between the old and the young.
The loss of communication between our elders and our children is detrimental to
both age groups and to the community at large.

BENEFITS OF CROSS-GENERATIONAL COMMUNICATION

Fostering interpersonal communication between elders and young children can have
very positive affects on the children. The more contact children have with older
adults the more positive associations children have with the elderly and the better
understanding children have of the aging process (Powell & Arquitt, 1978;
Chamberlain, et al., 1994). Children that have participated in intergenerational
programs tend to score higher in social development – they tend to be more polite
and more adept at interpersonal communication than children that do not have any
contact with elders (Chaker, 2003). Intergenerational interaction and
communication can help children establish healthy styles of communication for
school, work, and for life (Kuehne & Collins, 1997). When children interact with
elders they gain a heightened appreciation of the past, of cultural traditions and
personified history (Chamberlain, et al., 1994).
 Newstead 5

When interaction is fostered between children and older adults that are not
teachers, or formal caregivers, unique relationships often develop, because the
elderly people “tend to exhibit more natural, familial-type behaviours and relate to
children in less formal ways” (Kaplan & Larkin, 2004, p. 157). Interacting with older
adults can increase a child’s self-esteem when opportunities arise to be of
assistance to the elder, by doing such things as teaching an elder a computer skill
(Chamberlain, et al., 1994). Surrounding young kids with positive elders provides
children with positive role models (Hopkins, 2001). Children that participate in
sustained interpersonal communication with elders benefit socially,
communicatively, and emotionally.

Intergenerational communication benefits children; it also benefits elders.

Many elders are shuffled aside and isolated by their age group. Older people that
once led vibrant lives get to a certain age and suddenly no longer have a role, such
as a profession, to make them feel important and valued (Conyers, 1996). Our
elderly are the most depressed demographic in North America, and their depression
often goes undiagnosed. The most effective treatment for depression in elderly
people is interpersonal communication; contact with other people (Benek-Higgins,
et al, 2008). When elderly people engage in interpersonal communication and
relationships with young children they are given a sense of importance; their
wisdom and life experience are appreciated and given value. The opportunity to
interact with young children can detract from elders’ depression, and sense of being
shuffled aside.

Young people that have negative stereotypes about the elderly often reverse
these negative stereotypes after positive communication experiences (McCann, et
al., 2005). While negative stereotypes about the elderly are most common among
the young, it is also possible for young children to form positive stereotypes about
the elderly. When children have positive stereotypes about elders they are more
likely to initiate contact with older adults. By communicating with young people, the
elderly are provided with an opportunity to dispel negative stereotypes about their
age bracket. When intergenerational interaction and communication is fostered the
elderly actively partake in dispelling negative stereotypes and building positive
ones, they show a decrease in solitary behaviours and depression, and an increase
in participation in social activities (Salari, 2002). Cross-generation interpersonal
 Newstead 6

communications, communications that used to take place within the extended

family, “give older adults needed feelings of accomplishment, worth, and joy”
(Hopkins, 2001, p. 317).

The benefits of interpersonal communication across generations as outlined

above, translate into the community. Happier elders and more socially conscious
children have a positive affect on the community. Through intergenerational
interpersonal communication positive stereotypes supplant negative stereotypes.
As children that have had extended, interpersonal relationships with elderly people
mature they grow to posses a more well rounded understanding of the aging
process and place more value on the wisdom and cultural heritage possessed by
older community members. By being valued, older community members will feel
less shuffled aside. When interpersonal communication is fostered between the old
and the young, relationships comparable to those that used to occur within the
extended family are fostered. When we view our community as family we tend to be
more conscientious citizens.

INSTANCES OF FOSTERED CROSS-GENERATIONAL COMMUNICATION

The community programs and care facilities that do foster intergenerational

interpersonal communication “have emerged because human service workers,
nurses, activity therapists, educators, community development workers, and others
working with children, youth, older adults, and their families have realized the
richness of knowledge and experience that can be shared in the interactions and
relationships between persons of sometimes vastly different ages” (Kuehne &
Collins, 1978, p. 184). Intergenerational programs have been pioneered in schools,
nursing homes, universities, detention homes, churches, childcare centres, mixed-
aged daycare centres, and pre-existing age specific clubs (Chamberlain, et al.,
1994).

At one school on Staten Island, NY, a pen pal program was set up between a
grade two classroom and a senior citizens’ centre. The school children wrote letters
to the elders telling them about themselves, and asking questions. The facilitators
of the pen pal program were shocked at some of the questions the children asked
 Newstead 7

about the seniors: “Do they like spaghetti?” and, “What do they do all day?”
(Hopkins, 2001, p. 318). It was obvious to the facilitators that the children thought
seniors were “strange, mysterious creatures from another age” (Hopkins, 2001, p.
318). Over the course of the year the seniors and the young students exchanged
numerous letters. The letters covered topics such as what the senior used to do for
work, what the children were working on in school, and what kinds of foods either
party liked (it turns out some elders do like spaghetti!). The letters contained
drawings, personal and family stories, and encouragement and support from the
seniors. Through this fostered interaction between young and old, the seniors were
given a sense of worth, and the children learned that “the seniors were real people,
regular people, just like them – only older” (Hopkins, 2001, p. 318).

In Cook County, Illinois, one school founded a “Senior Exchange Program”.

Healthy, keen seniors are paid an hourly wage to come into the school and provide
services such as computer lab support, reading, writing, and math tutoring, and hot
lunch service (Conyers, 1996). The seniors that participate in this program come
from backgrounds such as corporate executives, homemakers, and trades people. In
addition to providing valuable services, the participating seniors offer children
exposure to a living history, and “over the years this program has proven to be a
wonderful experience of love, sharing, and compassion for both kids and seniors”
(Conyers, 1996, p. 16).

The Glenwood, in Bridgewater, Vermont, provides care for both the very
young and the very old. The Glenwood is a private care facility that is home to six
live-in seniors, and during the day, cares for 14 pre-schoolers. The elders and the
young children inhabit the same space during the day, they take their meals
together, and they engage in group activities. In time, natural, familial relationships
between the old and the young develop (Chamberlain, et al., 1994). The
relationships fostered at The Glenwood closely replicate the kinds of relationships
that were fostered within the family before the increase in mobility and family
fragmentation.

Innovative care facilities such as The Glenwood, and school and community
programs such as Senior Exchange and pen pals are beginning to address the
generational communication gap between our elders and our children. By fostering
 Newstead 8

interpersonal communication between the old and the young these community
programs and care facilities are recreating the kinds of relationships that have been
lost to the recent changes in our extended families. Interpersonal communication
between the very young and the very old has numerous benefits for both age
groups. Interpersonal communication between the very young and the very old
builds a stronger community. And, interpersonal communication between the very
young and the very old ensures the survival of our traditions, culture, and heritage.
 Newstead 9

Reference:

Benek-Higgins, M., McReynolds, C., Hogan, E., & Savickas, S. (2008) Depression and
the elder person: the enigma of misconceptions, stigma, and treatment. Journal of
Mental Health Counseling, 30(4), 283-296.

Chaker, A. (2003) Putting toddlers in a nursing home; day care programs for young
and old grow in popularity, but kids’ germs are a worry. Wall Street Journal,
September, D.1

Chamberlain, V., Fetterman, E., & Maher, M. (1994) Innovation in elder and child
care: an intergenerational experience. Educational Gerontology, 20(2), 193 – 204.

Conyers, J. (1996) Building bridges between generations. Educational Leadership,

April,14-16.

Cornille, T., Mullis, R., Mullis, A., & Shriner, M. (2005) An examination of childcare
teachers in for-profit and non-profit childcare centers. Early Child Development and
Care, 176(6), 631-641.

Folwell, A., & Grant, J. A. (2006). Adult grandchildren’s accounts of closeness and
changes in their grandparent relationships. Journal of the Northwest
Communication Association, 35, 1-21

Hopkins, G. (2000) How important are intergenerational programs in today’s

schools? Phi Delta Kappan, 82(4), 317-319.

Kuehne, V., & Collins, C. (1997) Observational research in intergenerational

programming. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 28(3), 183-193.

Kaplan, M. & Larkin, E. (2004) Launching intergenerational programs in early

childhood settings: a comparison of explicit intervention with an emergent
approach. Early Childhood Education Journal, 31(3), 157-

McCann, R., Dailey, R., Giles, H., & Ota, H. (2005) Beliefs about intergenerational
communication across the lifespan: middle age and the roles of age stereotyping
and respect norms. Communication Studies. 56(4), 293-311.

Powell, J. & Arquitt, G. (1978) Getting the generations back together: a rationale for
development of community based intergenerational interaction programs. The
Family Coordinator, October, 421-426

Salari, S. (2002) Intergenerational partnerships in adult day centres, importance of

age-appropriate environments and behaviours. The Gerontologist. (42), 321-333