Is this primarily because of the intimacy, or is that just a side effect of a more compelling need?
I think the security measures are primarily to keep the more severely demented residents from wandering and potentially leaving the facility. It’s been a while since I visited that floor (my dad was friends with a neighbor who got moved up to that floor as her dementia progressed), but my recollection was that access (in or out) was controlled by a staff member.
It’s because residents on the floor described by Machine_Elf (or in the entire residence where my father lives) might leave the facility if left unsupervised, or if door were left unlocked. Or might enter unsafe areas (stairwells, kitchens, etc.). And if they did leave, they might forget how to get back to their residence, or floor within a residence. And so on.
There’s a world of difference between elderly people living in a residence because they need some physical assistance, and people living with dementia, whether at home or in an assisted living facility or in a “memory care” facility.
In my experience, people with dementia or Alzheimer’s are not able to give consent to anything, including sexual relationships. Yes, there are degrees of severity when talking about dementia, but dementia always causes diminished capacity.
I have nothing against consenting adults let their freak flag fly. But man, if date rape weren’t complicated enough, adding potentially diminished capacity in the participant pool makes it nigh impossible to know what’s consensual.
If you grew up in the Midwest you may remember the name Verne Gagne. He was on “All Star Wrestling,” an early form of something like WWF. He always seemed to be the champion. I’m sure the fact that he owned the AWA was completely unrelated. 
He later retired, and moved into a nursing home. I’m not sure when dementia set in but…
On January 26, 2009, Gagne got into an altercation with Helmut Gutmann, a 97-year-old resident of the Bloomington, Minnesota facility where they both resided. According to Gutmann’s widow, who was not present during the altercation, Gagne picked Gutmann up and hurled him to the floor, then broke his hip by pulling back on his body. “‘The attack happened quickly while the men were at a table,’ Bloomington Police Chief Jeff Potts said. ‘It was more like “a push and a shove” and it caused Gutmann to fall.’”[12]
Neither man had any recollection of the incident.[13] Gutmann was admitted to the hospital, and died on February 14 from complications of the injury.[14] On February 25, 2009, the older man’s death was officially ruled a homicide by the Hennepin County medical examiner’s office.[13] On March 12, 2009, the Hennepin County Prosecutor’s office officially announced that Gagne would not be criminally charged as a result of the death as, because of Gagne’s dementia, he lacked the mental capacity necessary to have intended to harm Gutmann.
Geez, killed a guy and didn’t remember it. Apply that to a consensual sex issue. The elderly man says he asked and she consented and maybe she did but she doesn’t remember. Or he denies having sex because he doesn’t remember it. Etc.
My mom, in 2015 or so, called. “I thought I’d give you a call while I’m waiting for your dad to come pick me up. Where is he?” (Thinking, but not saying: he died over ten years ago, mom) My pet theory here is that lucid people have a dream, wake up, and realize it was a dream. She couldn’t tell the difference any more and it became part of reality. What was the Disney thing, “A dream is a wish your heart makes when you’re fast asleep” or something like that?
One of these seniors thinks s/he had sex but it was only a dream?
Still no account of non-consensual sex at the old folks home. This thread sounds like my parent’s generation talking about the dangers of pre-marital sex. At least they could point to that girl who had sex, got pregnant, then had to go away to live with her relatives down south. But this is different, this is about ooooold people. They’re all senile, they don’t know what day it is, they’ll have sex with anybody. And of course it must be wrong because it’s sex.
Or is it all just ‘OMG, my mother had sex! She’d never consent to that if she were in her right mind!’
There may be people who think something like that. I don’t know. I’m not one of them. I certainly didn’t object to my father forming a relationship (presumably sexual) with and ultimately marrying a woman of his own age. I was pretty happy about it, in fact, and attended the wedding. And the wedding was officiated by the same priest, a relative, who married my father and my mother many decades back, which indicates that the whole family was just fine with this relationship.
But he didn’t suffer from dementia then. And what I do know is that dementia can’t be removed from the equation in many cases, or in any case. Dementia, even mild dementia, without question affects the ability to consent.
I don’t know what you consider mild dementia. As already noted, people with severe dementia are protected. If anybody is in one of these facilities voluntarily then they can consent to sex. I’d spend more time questioning how voluntarily some of them are living there.
Consent is always a concern with sex, for everybody of every age there are potential consent issues. I don’t see something characterized as ‘mild dementia’ being worse than ‘severe teenage hormone overload’, or ‘moderate midlife crisis’, or ‘just horny as all get out’.
Good points, of course.
Certainly I’d agree with you that some residents of such facilities may be there not entirely voluntarily. That doesn’t mean they don’t need to be there, and in some cases their children, or their spouses, may have had to go to court to be appointed a guardian (or whatever works in a given jurisdiction).
In that case, when a person is found to need a court-appointed guardian,* surely we can agree that their ability to consent to pretty much anything is impaired?
But if a person is in such a facility voluntarily (my father, for example, understood that he could no longer live on his own), does that necessarily mean that they’re able to consent to sexual activity (or anything else)? We’d agree, I think, that many such older people cannot handle their own finances, or shouldn’t be entrusted with a car (or even a stove). It’s hard to say that someone who cannot write a check can consent to sex. That person could want sex, of course, but consent? Imagine a person who enthusiastically consents to sex one day, but the next forgets that he/she gave consent, and now says he/she was abused (actually, I say “imagine,” but this is an all too real scenario). What of that?
As to what I consider mild dementia, I leave that to the doctors. I can observe the effects, but I don’t understand the process.
I understand what you’re saying. I do. It’s just that my experience leads me to believe that
is not an accurate assessment of the state of mind and ability to consent of people with dementia.
- I know there are issues with guardianships, especially in some jurisdictions (I’m thinking of Nevada in particular). But that’s another discussion altogether.
I don’t agree. Those acts requires a lot more detail and responsibility and mishandling them can result in great harm. I don’t see someone having sex that they might have thought differently about at a different time is some terrible thing. With younger people it’s called dating.
OK, how about this hypothetical? You’ve got a married couple, both faithful and monogamous, married back when they were both 25. Ever since their wedding day, they’ve had sex every night, an arrangement that both have been quite satisfied with. And they’ve both been blessed with long life: They’re both now 85, and need help with a lot of things, but they’ve managed to maintain their sexual routine (possibly with the help of Viagra, or maybe they’re just lucky enough not to need it). They’re both in assisted living, or a full nursing home, or some other level of elder care, but in a facility that’s able to still keep them together.
But now suppose that one of them is slipping into severe dementia. Or both of them, even. And suppose that it’s dementia so severe that, under other circumstances, they wouldn’t be competent to give consent. Now, clearly, they both consented back when they were both of sound mind… but is that enough? Can they be assumed to still consent?
I would assume they gave consent for a lifetime long ago and it’s not an issue unless one of them wants to withdraw their consent. And if anyone thinks that one or both of them are so far gone they couldn’t express withdrawing consent it needs some explicit reason why it’s harmful to be anyone else’s business other than ‘OMG it’s sex! It has to be bad!’.
ETA: This took too long to write. So I’ve been partly ninja’d. @Saintly_Loser just below my second @TriPolar quote was the last post when I started. …
Completely setting aside the blue-nose objections that power much of the recreational outrage in the cited article comments, although not so much here in this thread …
Let’s just take the continuum of alcohol intoxication. Note that nothing below is gender-specific. Along the way sex can be:
-
Fully consensual happy fun for me. Before, during, and after. Glad I did it and glad to do it again.
-
Fun at the time, and I’m glad I did it but now the next day I see that wasn’t one of my best decisions. I should probably say “no” next time.
-
Fun at the time, but now the next day I really wish I hadn’t done that. But I acknowledge that I did and take responsibility for my conscious decision. Next time will be “No” for sure!
-
Overall I was buzzed enough that I was only mildy interested but went ahead. I never really formed an opinion yes or no and just followed along where I was led. That was my failure by omission. Oops on me.
-
Wasn’t having fun at the time, but didn’t have the gumption to say so or stop the proceedings. That was my failure by commission. Crap!
-
Was too scared / confused / wasted to do anything but go along. Gosh I’m angry at that person for what they did. (I’m now angry at myself too for not standing up for myself when I knew at the time I should have.)
-
Sex? Did I have sex? When? With who? WTF!!! I had no idea! That raping bastard should be shot!
Of the list above, which are OK for two 20-somethings and which are not? And as one of the participants, how to know the mental state of the other?
Switching back to the mentally-fading elderly there is one additional level:
- Thirty minutes later: Sex? What’s that? Who are you and what is my name?
As each elderly person slides down the “intoxication” scale from 1 to 8 at their own rate these questions loom large:
- What is my mental state on the above scale?
- What is my partner’s mental state on the above scale?
- How well does my perception of my partner’s mental state match their perception of their mental state?
- Do I (or they) have the ability to even ask (or answer) these questions with any reliability?
Just like with the 20-something case I'll argue that two different measures of badness arise:
- The farther apart the two participants are on the scale, the more likely this attempt at sex is a bad thing.
- The farther down the scale either (or both) participants, the more likely the sex is a bad thing. Two 7s are bad in a different way than a 2 and a 7, but two 7s are still bad. A 4+5 is where a lot of babies come from. Not ideal, but not irredeemably evil either. IMO.
Folks who insist only 1+1 is good enough are allowing 1+2 to be retroactively declared “rape”. IMO that’s too far, both for youngsters and oldsters.
But asserting that oldsters are immune from being sexually abused just because they’re old & can’t get pregnant / impregnate is both dumb and irresponsible.
My posts above assumed single people, which seems to be much more common in nursing homes or memory care facilities.
Absolutely, married couples are a whole different story.
I just don’t know. I really don’t. We’re still, in your hypothetical, talking about people who have “dementia so severe that, under other circumstances, they wouldn’t be competent to give consent.” The different circumstance here is that they are married.
And so we presume that consent, once given, is still operative. And maybe that’s a fair assumption. And maybe it isn’t – maybe one partner had declared years before that he/she was no longer interested in sex. But that person is no longer competent to reverse that withdrawal of consent.
And even with marriage between young, healthy people, people who have generally (and enthusiastically) consented to sex, well, one day, one partner may not feel like it. And, in a healthy marriage, that’s understood, and respected. How does that work in the case of people who aren’t competent to give consent?
I really don’t know what the right answer is in your hypothetical. I suppose it all comes down to individual cases. But who can assess those cases, and determine if someone can give consent? Outside of a court (which would of course require medical documentation), I just don’t know.
I think @Chronos’s question is one that married people should themselves consider. I think it’s possible to have “consent unless rescinded” as an option, and that it can even possibly be the default when married. But I think it should be something the couple makes clear, so that no one messes up and assumes the wrong answer. Heck, I wouldn’t put it past putting in writing.
I will add one thing: even if someone is too far gone to withdraw consent normally, I do think you could see them actually fighting someone off or screaming in pain or other things as being a withdrawal of consent.
In prior years it was a matter of law that a husband could not be guilty of raping his wife. The wife’s decision to get married was irrevocable permanent consent to whatever hubby later wanted.
Fortunately society (although not all its members) has moved beyond that primitive attitude. Consent can still be assumed, but that doesn’t mean one can ignore the signs, or words, or actions of disinterest or refusal from their spouse.
Sure. I could also see someone not fighting or screaming (or, in advanced cases of dementia, and especially in cases of Alzheimer’s, not even understanding what was going on).
Also, I’m sure it’s not what you’re saying, but the idea that if there wasn’t screaming or physical resistance, then it wasn’t non-consensual sex is (I hope) something we’ve put very far behind us.
Yes, of course, physical resistance is irrefutable evidence of the withdrawal of consent (if consent was ever given), but the absence of physical resistance is most definitely not evidence, in and of itself, of consent.
The discussion has veered off into rape. And such things do occur in nursing homes and rehab facilities to people who are too physically or mentally disabled to object. And those events are crimes.
How could it not veer off into rape? What we’re discussing is whether or not some older people have the ability to consent to sexual activity. If someone is not capable of giving consent, then any sexual activity with that person is non-consensual, and may meet the legal standard for rape.
Fair enough. But obviously, it’s wrong for someone who lacks the ability to consent to be forced into a sexual activity. Surely no one will disagree with that.
What I’m wondering is whether a self-styled Casanova who works his way through the female population of the senior home is a predator, even if everyone on both sides is fully capable of consenting and has consented.
A guy who is considered a predator is said to “take advantage of” the girls. What constitutes “taking advantage of” in the context of the senior home?
Of course. But, as we see above, some don’t consider dementia and decreased cognitive function to impair the ability to consent. And there’s plenty of room for disagreement there.
If dementia, Alzheimer’s and cognitive function are completely out of the picture, and everyone involved is clearly fully capable of consent, and has consented, unambiguously, to sex, how is such a “self-styled Casanova” a predator?
Also, calling that person “Casanova” seems to limit the discussion to men. I’d say the same for a sexually active woman who’s worked her way through the male population of a senior home.
Does the sex of the “Casanova” make a difference?