A Judicial Rashomon: On Ageism and Narrative Justice

How are old people treated in courts? How do judges construct old age? To what extent judicial decisions regarding older persons reflect ageist attitudes? Historically, these questions have received relatively little attention in gerontological literature. This Israeli case-study tries to add a new dimension to the growing literature in the field of jurisprudential gerontology, in a context that so far received little attention: narrative justice. More specifically, this study combines a narrative-justice theoretical approach, with a legal case-study methodology, in order to explore the relationships between judicial narratives and ageism. The narrative analysis presented in this case study exposes how in contrast to common perception, which views legal decisions as objective and unimaginative texts, reality is different. The judicial case studied in this article exemplify how in real life, judges often construct a socio-judicial narrative, embellished by personal bias and prejudices regarding old age.