A Judicial Rashomon: On Ageism and Narrative Justice

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


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.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)17-28
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of Cross-Cultural Gerontology
Issue number1
StatePublished - Mar 2012


  • Agism
  • Elder law
  • Jurisprudential Gerontology
  • Justice
  • Narrative Justice

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health(social science)
  • Geriatrics and Gerontology


Dive into the research topics of 'A Judicial Rashomon: On Ageism and Narrative Justice'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this