The Individual Plan for Retirement

Abstract

Persons with disabilities aged 65 and older are a large and rapidly increasing cohort of the population of those who qualify for rehabilitation services. In providing services to this age group, one issue that has been barely mentioned in the literature is retirement planning. This article argues for the need to address this issue as an integral part of the rehabilitation counseling process with older consumers and proposes the development of a formal Individual Plan for Retirement (IPR) as a supplement to the Individualized Plan for Employment (IPE) for these consumers. The article suggests a six-step process for constructing and implementing an IPR (RETIRE). Relevant literature on adjustment to retirement and on vocational rehabilitation, independent living, and avocational counseling for older persons with disabilities is summarized.

Keywords

strategies rehabilitation counseling aging disability(ies)counseling career/vocational life issues

This article makes the case for rehabilitation counselors to be prepared to assist older consumers with retirement planning and suggests a product (the IPR: Individual Plan for Retirement) and procedure (RETIRE) to help provide this service. This case is based on four incontrovertible facts: (a) people are living longer; (b) people are working (full- or part-time) until later in life; (c) the incidence and prevalence of disabilities increase dramatically with aging; and (d) rehabilitation counseling is the only profession that focuses on the intersection of disability, work, accommodation, and inclusion. Therefore, just as rehabilitation counselors assist people with disabilities into (school-to-work transitioning) and through their work lives, they should assist them with the transition at the other end of their work lives, retirement. First, it is instructive to look at two trends related to rehabilitation counseling with older consumers. On the one hand, the 2010 U.S. Census indicates that the number of Americans aged 65 and older (40.3 million people) is at its highest level in our history, having risen from 35 million in 2000. People aged 65 and older now make up 13% of the population, up from 12.4% in 2000. This trend is expected to accelerate over the next decade as more baby boomers enter this age cohort (Brandon, 2012). Moreover, an AARP (2004) survey of baby boomers found that 79% of respondents expect to work full- or part-time during their retirement years, either because they want to or because they need the additional income. The 2010 Census data also indicate that 49.8% of the 65 and older cohort has a disability, which is more than double the 21.3% of the 15 years and older cohort (Brault, 2012). As people continue to live longer, the percentage of the 65 and older cohort with a disability will inevitably rise, as the number of aging individuals acquiring a disability will surely exceed those moving out of disabled status (Barros-Bailey, Fischer, & Saunders, 2007). This rapidly increasing population of older persons with disabilities is affected by a number of federal laws (Sink & Craft, 1981), including the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA, Pub. L. 90–202, as amended), which prohibits employment discrimination against anyone above 40 on the basis of age, and by Title I of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA, Pub. L. 101–336, as amended), which prohibits employment discrimination against persons with disabilities. Taken together, these laws mandate the provision of service to the increasing number of persons aged 65 and older who desire and could benefit from rehabilitation services (J. S. Wadsworth, Smith, & Kampfe, 2006). In 1981, Sink and Craft noted that the number of aged persons who were eligible for rehabilitation services far exceeded any previously targeted category of consumers; and since then, this number has continued to increase at an accelerated rate.

Paradoxically, in stark contrast to the rapid growth of this potential clientele for rehabilitation services, the rehabilitation counseling literature has paid decreasing attention to this population. For example, in the decade of 1985–1994, there were five articles concerning the rehabilitation of older persons published in the Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin (Brown & Roessler, 1991; Finnerty-Fried, 1985; Finnerty-Fried, Myers, & Barry, 1986; Kivnick, 1985; Myers, 1985), but only one article appeared in the 1995–2004 decade (J. Wadsworth & Kampfe, 2004) and one in the 2005–2014 decade (J. S. Wadsworth, Estrada-Hernandez, Kampfe, & Smith, 2008). Therefore, this article necessarily and unapologetically references a number of studies from before 1995 that make relevant points. As McCarthy (2014) recently asserted in this journal, to advance the knowledge base of the field, older but potentially still cogent contributions to the rehabilitation counseling literature that have dropped out of sight “warrant informed recognition, renewed attention, and contemporary application” (p. 73). This article is intended to promote increased interest in meeting the needs of older consumers and, in particular, to focus on retirement planning, an aspect of rehabilitation planning with older persons that has received extremely limited attention (except for persons with intellectual disabilities; Cordes & Howard, 2005; Fesko, Hall, Quinlan, & Jockell, 2012; Laughlin & Cotten, 1994; Llewellyn, Balandin, Dew, & McConnell, 2004; Sutton, Park, & Schwartz, 1993; J. S. Wadsworth, Harper, & McLeran, 1995). A PsycINFO search of the 1,030 entries for “rehabilitation counseling” between 1954 and 2014 yielded only one relevant hit for the subcategory of “retirement planning,” the Wadsworth et al. (1995) article.

One may ask whether this lack of attention reflects a belief that retirement is antithetical to the goals of rehabilitation, which focus on restoring people to work. If so, the response to this belief is that the nature of retirement has changed (McVittie & Goodall, 2012) and frequently involves part-time work or a second career (Roos, 2011). In a qualitative study of older workers engaged in bridge employment (i.e., transitional jobs between their long-term employment and retirement), Ulrich and Brott (2005) found that “bridge employment redefines retirement” (p. 166). Even if a consumer is planning to leave the labor force completely, rehabilitation counselors have unique expertise that can assist with that transition, and as exiting work is still part of work (Beveridge, Craddock, Liesener, Stapleton, & Hershenson, 2002), rehabilitation counselors have an obligation to provide that assistance. Thus, the old dictum that rehabilitation counselors do not need to address this issue because social security will meet the financial needs of older workers with disabilities makes no more sense today than arguing that all rehabilitation services are unnecessary because consumers could survive on welfare. With that in mind, this article proposes that rehabilitation counselors (or at least some specialists within each agency) must be prepared to assist older consumers develop an IPR as a supplement to the Individual Plan for Employment (IPE). For counselors in the state-federal system, retirement planning could fit within Status 32, post-employment services. One may, of course, expect some resistance to asking counselors in state-federal agencies to add this task to their already onerous workload, particularly because retirement planning does not appear to contribute to increasing the number of 26 closures nor is it on the list of services currently called for by the Rehabilitation Act. The first of these issues may be addressed by the fact that employment has not been the sole goal of rehabilitation services ever since Title VII of the Rehabilitation Act of 1978 added independent living (IL) as an acceptable outcome. As to the second issue, as has already been noted, today retirement more often than not includes continuing to work on at least a part-time basis. Moreover, older workers who are facing the prospect of retirement frequently have their current work impaired by anxiety, depression, and disorientation brought on by the prospect of having to retire (Osborne, 2012). Therefore, retirement planning can fit within one of the currently stated purposes of the Rehabilitation Act, to assist persons with disabilities to maintain their employment. In terms of adding this function to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Vocational Rehabilitation Counseling Service, the Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System website (n.d.) already lists its counseling services as offering “vocational counseling, educational counseling and retirement counseling.” For rehabilitation counselors in voluntary agencies and in full- or part-time private practice, life care planning (Berens & Weed, 2009) provides a successful model for rehabilitation counselors offering a service not mandated by the Rehabilitation Act. In the final analysis, if rehabilitation counseling is truly a profession, its scope of practice cannot be determined by the regulations of any given employer. The question must be as follows: Does providing retirement counseling address an essential need of our clientele and are rehabilitation counselors uniquely qualified to provide this service? This article answers both parts of this question in the affirmative. Therefore, this article will suggest a procedure for developing and implementing an IPR. As background for that discussion, the relevant literature on adjustment to retirement must first be briefly reviewed.

Adjustment to Retirement

Wang, Henkens, and van Solinge (2011) recently reviewed the literature on psychological adjustment to retirement, focusing on two key research issues: (a) the impact of retirement on the individual and (b) the factors that affect the quality of adjustment to retirement. They found that the meaning of retirement was multifaceted, changed over time, and could no longer be defined as a single, one-time event. Feldman and Beehr (2011) suggested that the decision to retire can be viewed as a three-step process: (a) imagining the possibility of retirement, (b) reviewing one’s past and current career status, and (c) concluding that it is time to retire and acting on that decision. The timing and content of each of these steps will vary with individual differences in such traits as optimism, level of self-esteem, imaginativeness, moodiness, resilience, attention to detail, sociability, assertiveness, conscientiousness, and willingness to take risks. Richardson (1993) reported that most retirees go through a distinctive period of adjustment before their lifestyle stabilizes.

There are three widely applied, and often contradictory, general theories of retirement behavior: disengagement theory, continuity theory, and activity theory. Disengagement theory (Cumming & Henry, 1961) posits that when people retire, their lives change drastically; they withdraw not only from work but also from their established place in society. Disengagement implies both discontinuity and inactivity, and so inevitably two other theories have been posited, one to counter each of these implications. Continuity theory (Atchley, 1989) holds that people try to maintain the same routines of living in retirement that they had established in their working years. Both because of the social undesirability of its predicted outcome and because of societal changes in retirement patterns since the theory was formulated, disengagement theory has received less research support than continuity theory. When applied in practice, these two theories can best be seen as the poles of a continuum, with most people falling somewhere along that continuum rather than at either extreme. Activity theory (Knapp, 1977) posits that people adjust best to retirement if they remain highly active and maximally involved in activities or social interactions. Some research has shown a positive correlation between high activity and well-being, but this theory runs the risk of placing unrealistic demands on many retirees for whom some activities are no longer available or are prohibitively expensive. Moreover, it stigmatizes those individuals who see retirement as a time to live at a more leisurely pace. Designed specifically for aging people with disabilities, stabilization theory (Maynard, 1974) offers a middle path between the extremes of activity theory and disengagement theory. Stabilization theory posits that as people move into old age, they take stock of their lives and choose to remain fully engaged in those activities, interests, and attitudes with which they are comfortable but discard the rest.

Several social psychological theories have also been applied to adjustment to retirement; these include social identity theory, social–normative theory, and role theory (the first two cited by Feldman & Beehr, 2011, and the third by Richardson, 1993). Social identity theory proposes that a person’s image of retirees as a group affects his or her motivation to become part of that group. A person who views retirees positively will be more likely to adjust to retirement more easily than one who sees retirees in a negative light. Hence, one’s image of retirees affects his or her readiness to take on the activities, roles, and persona associated with being a retiree. Social–normative theories posit that an individual’s perception of social norms affects his or her retirement decisions, such as what constitutes a socially acceptable age at which to retire and what behaviors are appropriate for a retiree. One’s peers and social reference group largely determine the norms one accepts. Because people differ in the degree to which they are willing to conform to social norms, the impact of this factor on post-retirement decisions will vary from person to person. Finally, role theory holds that the particular society in which people live places them in various roles and defines the behaviors and attitudes that they are expected to play in each of these roles. Thus, moving from the role of worker to the role of retiree means that one is expected to take on a different set of attitudes and behaviors that are consistent with one’s new role.

Another factor affecting one’s retirement plans is how happy one was with one’s work and living situations prior to retirement. The more satisfied a person is, the more likely she or he will seek to retain or replicate those situations (Donaldson, Earl, & Muratore, 2010). Current situational factors also have a major impact on retirement plans. These factors include age, health status, financial needs and resources, attitudes of the individual and her or his family toward retirement, family obligations (such as coordinating with the plans of one’s spouse or significant other or needing to be available for active grandparenting), the state of the local and national economy and labor market, and the educational, work, and leisure resources available in the local area (Rowe & Kahn, 1997).

In addition to looking at factors affecting retirement plans that have been identified by various theories or research programs, the counselor should also be aware of the group of studies that have suggested the kinds of retirement adjustment styles used by different individuals (Jensen-Scott, 1993). Walker, Kimmel, and Price (1981) identified four styles used by retirees: (a) Reorganizers, who had looked forward to retiring and made plans to be active in retirement; (b) Holding On, those who desired to continue their prior working lifestyle; (c) Rocking Chair, who desired to reduce their level of activity from what they did during their working years; and (d) Dissatisfied, usually forced into retirement, who lack the personal resources to make a satisfying and satisfactory adjustment to their new status. Hornstein and Wapner (1985) also identified a similar set of four styles of adjustment to retirement. These were as follows: (a) New Beginning, (b) Continuation, (c) Transition to Old Age, and (d) Imposed Disruption. Finally, Schlossberg (2004) suggested five styles: (a) Adventurers, who seek to start something new; (b) Continuers, who want to keep doing much as they had done in their middle years; (c) Searchers, who energetically move by trial and error to find a comfortable option; (d) Easy Gliders, who want to relax and are content go wherever life takes them; and (e) Retreaters, who give up and disengage. Schlossberg’s distinction from the two earlier models is that she split their third category into two, based on the retiree’s level of active engagement in shaping the direction of their retirement. This background information on how older persons in general deal with retirement will now be applied to retirement planning with older persons with disabilities.

The Individual Plan for Retirement

There are numerous studies documenting the fact that older persons with disabilities are disproportionately underserved by rehabilitation agencies (for example, Bernacchio et al., 2009; Spitznagel & Saxon, 1995; J. Wadsworth, 2004), despite the earlier findings that consumers above 70 years had at least as successful employment experience as a matched group of consumers aged 55 to 69 (Rusalem, 1963) and that consumers aged 50 and older were as likely to be successfully rehabilitated as consumers aged 49 and younger, and at lower cost (Rasch, 1979). As rehabilitation counselors come to serve a greater number of older consumers, the issue of retirement, either voluntary or involuntary, will inevitably arise. As Osborne (2012) pointed out, the transition into retirement is fraught with such issues as identity disruption, decision anxiety, loss of self-assurance, disruption of social supports, and existential anxiety. Taylor-Carter, Cook, and Weinberg (1997) noted that research on retirement planning indicates that it can be effective in addressing many of these issues, including the reduction of retirement-related anxiety and depression and the improvement of retirement goal setting and adjustment. Currently, however, retirement is the unmentioned elephant in the living room of IPE planning with older consumers. As noted earlier, today, retirement does not necessarily mean that a person stops working, either part-time or even full-time at an encore career. Retirement may involve participating in such activities as paid employment, volunteer work, new learning experiences (such as senior learning programs), avocations, active grandparenting, community service, physical exercise, travel, or passive relaxation (Ghilani, 2014). For some persons with disabilities, any of these activities may require accommodations. Other considerations include attitudes of the individual and her or his family toward retirement, the age of onset (Kemp, 1985) and projected course of the individual’s disability (stable, progressive, or episodic; Beveridge et al., 2002), the consumer’s economic needs and resources, the existence of accessible venues offering the desired activity, and available transportation. Because of the complexity of these considerations, it is necessary to formulate a document that specifies retirement goals, the services and accommodations required to attain them, who is responsible for each of these services, a timeline for delivery of the services, and criteria for evaluating progress toward the goals. As with the IPE, the IPR should be developed cooperatively by the counselor and the consumer. Because all rehabilitation counselors and previously served consumers are familiar with the process of developing and implementing an IPE, it makes sense to follow as closely as possible the same format and procedure in developing and implementing an IPR. As Llewellyn et al. (2004) suggested, “The key to healthy post-retirement ageing may be pre-retirement planning” (p. 367), a statement that may be particularly true of persons with disabilities who face an additional set of challenges. To facilitate the process of developing and implementing the IPR, the following six-step program is proposed.

RETIRE: A Program for Developing and Implementing the IPR

The following program is proposed to provide a set of structured, clearly defined steps through which the counselor and consumer may collaborate to develop and implement an IPR. The six steps that form the acronym RETIRE are as follows: (a) Review past career, including effects of disability on it, (b) Explore available options and set tentative goals, (c) Test feasibility of needed supports and finalize the IPR, (d) Implement the IPR fully, (e) Reevaluate the plan after 1 year, and (f) End (if all is going smoothly) or Extend services (if needed).

For the past half century, life reviews have been used in counseling seniors, many of whom report enjoying and benefitting from this exercise. These reviews are typically structured around one or more life themes, such as family or work, and assist the person to understand the systematic relationship among events in her or his life (Haber, 2006). In the rehabilitation counseling setting, the principal themes are usually career history and experience with disability. Career review should include education (preparation for work), employment history, and avocational activities. In each of these three areas, interests and aversions, abilities and limitations, successes and failures should be reviewed. Based on this review, a transferable skills inventory and a life role salience hierarchy (Nevill & Calvert, 1996) should be constructed. For older consumers, past experience is the richest source of data, particularly given the paucity of age-normed tests for this population. It is also important to review how the person’s disability has affected her or his life in general and career in particular. The review should suggest possible directions for post-retirement activity, including both activities to be continued from past stages of the person’s career and new directions to be explored. Simon (1995) recommended the use of vocational narrative script development as a way to elicit and clarify retirement goals.

The first step in exploring options is to establish parameters of (a) available time for projected activities (after taking into account time spent on activities of daily living and health maintenance, family responsibilities, and continuing work required to meet financial needs), (b) limitations resulting from age or disability (mobility, energy level, sensory deficits, etc.), (c) availability of community resources (for example, appropriate full- or part-time employment options, senior centers, adult education programs, libraries, clubs and service organizations, accessible transportation), and (d) environmental barriers (such as limited work options, severe weather conditions, lack of public transportation, negative community attitudes toward seniors). Myers (1985) suggested that rehabilitation counselors mobilize the local network of aging-related community resources such as senior centers, government aging agencies, visiting nurses associations, and nutrition programs to support their older consumers’ transitions.

After these parameters are established, it is necessary to generate a list of possible activities that fit within them. Hillman (2002) demonstrated the beneficial role of work in the lives of retired men who had experienced strokes. Possible full- or part-time employment options can be located from the local one-stop career center or often better, by networking. Harper and Shoffner (2004) found the theory of work adjustment (TWA) a useful framework for helping retirees who want to continue working explore possible occupations or jobs. Possible avocational activities can be suggested by Messer, Greene, Kovacs, and Holland’s (2013) SDS Leisure Activities Finder, Revised for the 5th Ed., which is keyed to Holland’s RIASEC (Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, and Conventional) system; Liptak’s (2015) Career Exploration Inventory, 5th Ed., which is keyed to the Department of Education career clusters; Overs et al.’s (1972) Guide to avocational activities, Vol. II, found at http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED063704.pdf (rather dated but thorough and designed specifically for use with persons with disabilities); or the extensive list of hobbies on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_hobbies). Senior learning options are available at most colleges and universities and at many senior centers. Listings of local opportunities for volunteering and community service can be found online or at most senior centers, public libraries, and city halls. Balandin, Llewellyn, Dew, Ballin, and Schneider (2006) indicated that workers with disabilities contemplating retirement may need considerable support to volunteer successfully. Working together, the consumer and counselor generate a list of six or seven apparently feasible activities, including needed supports for each, that fit the established parameters and the consumer’s interests and capacities. The items on this list are then ranked by the consumer for preference as possible goals.

Then, starting at the top of this list, the option and needed supports for it are reality tested for feasibility. Once sufficient activities to fill the consumer’s available time are demonstrated to be viable possibilities, a process that should take no more than 60 days, the counselor and consumer can construct and sign a formal IPR. This IPR is then implemented and followed regularly by the counselor for 1 year (with any modifications necessitated by intervening changes in the consumer’s capacities or in the nature of the activity). At the end of that time, the implementation of the IPR is reevaluated. If all is going according to plan and the consumer is satisfied, services can be ended; but if there are unresolved problems with implementing the IPR, the provision of services can be extended.

Applicable Findings on Rehabilitation Counseling With Older Consumers

Having outlined the RETIRE procedure, this article will conclude by reviewing the literature on rehabilitation counseling with older consumers that is applicable to carrying out this procedure. Four areas of the literature on rehabilitation counseling with older consumers will be discussed: vocational services, IL, avocational (also called “leisure”) activities, and needed counselor knowledge and attitudes. Underlying this review are several principles that are applicable to all of these areas. First is Kemp and Kleinplatz’s (1985) observation: “Older persons are not simply young persons who have lived longer. Significant physiological, psychological, and social changes have occurred during the aging process. These changes often interact with changes brought about by the disability” (p. 323). Second, it must be kept in mind that for most people, many skills and capacities do not change with aging, most changes that do occur are incremental rather than abrupt, and changes can be positive as well as negative. Thus, speed of recall or auditory acuity may decline, but conscientiousness or self-acceptance may improve. The third principle is that “the cohort of persons 60 to 100 years of age is as diverse as the cohort of persons 18 to 58 years of age” (J. S. Wadsworth et al., 2006, p. 218).

Vocational Services

Because contemporary retirement plans increasingly involve full-time, part-time, or bridge employment, vocational rehabilitative services are an essential part of the retirement planning process. J. Wadsworth and Kampfe (2004) found that obtaining employment was the principal reason that seniors sought services from the state-federal rehabilitation system. Since early in the history of the field, attention has been given to how to provide effective vocational rehabilitation services to older workers with disabilities. Rusalem and Dill (1961) documented the feasibility and value of workshop evaluation, counseling, training, and placement services in rehabilitating older persons with disabilities. Dunn (1981) emphasized the need for patient listening and careful explanation with older consumers, particularly on issues such as changed capacities (both those that have decreased and those that have increased with age) and reduced opportunities and status in the workplace. He also echoed Rusalem and Dill’s emphasis on the importance of placement services for successful outcome. Myers (1983) noted the need to help build self-esteem in consumers who face both the loss of many social supports and the prejudice of ageism. Kemp and Kleinplatz (1985), along with Myers, pointed out that older individuals seeking vocational rehabilitation are likely to have multiple disabilities. Kemp and Kleinplatz also called attention to the frequent presence of depression in this population, the need to mobilize family support, and the utility of transferable skills analysis. Kivnick (1985) emphasized the need to foster psychosocial resilience and vitality in older consumers to counter the effects of impairments. Roessler (1989) reported that the choice between retirement and returning to work for the mid-career disabled was affected by three motivational factors: probability of successful outcome, utility of the outcome, and associated costs. Herbert and Dambrocia (1989) pointed out that successful employment of older persons with disabilities required the participation of employers, as well as rehabilitation counselors and their clients. Kampfe, Wadsworth, Mamboleo, and Schonbrun (2008) noted that employer bias against individuals who are both older and have a disability tends to be greater than against those who manifest only one of these two characteristics. Finally, J. S. Wadsworth et al. (2008) found that of consumers aged 65 and older who participated in state-federal programs, about a third were rehabilitated to unpaid work and another third attained paid employment, with an average increase in earnings of about $5,000 a year.

Independent Living

Since 1978, when IL became an acceptable outcome of state-federal rehabilitation services, there have been a number of articles addressing how this outcome was particularly applicable to older consumers. Bozarth (1981) predicted that in working with older consumers, the goal of rehabilitation services would shift from work to IL. Myers (1983) indicated the need to focus on providing IL services “[w]here vocational goals are impractical” (p. 51). Williams (1981) specified the following services as particularly relevant to IL for older persons with disabilities: group counseling, mobility assistance, homemaker services, information and referral, and coordination of services. Doyle, Dixon, and Moore (2003) reviewed many of the legal issues that affect IL for older consumers, such as health care, financial resource management, insurance coverage, and long-term care. Rusalem and Rusalem (1981) reported on broad ranging community rehabilitation services in a retirement community (Sun City, Arizona), which were particularly effective in addressing age-related intellectual and cognitive decrements and showed promise of addressing issues of depression and loneliness.

Avocational (Leisure) Activities

By many definitions (e.g., Liptak, 1991), avocational (also called “leisure”) activities are an integral part of one’s career. Scherger, Nazroo, and Higgs (2011) found that participation in leisure activities (defined as having a hobby, being a member of a club, or participating in cultural events) generally tended to continue even with changes in work status and in age but to decline with illness. Rogers, Hawkins, and Eklund (1998) found that older adults with intellectual disability lacked opportunities to self-determine their leisure activities. Peevy (1984) and Liptak (1990) proposed models of leisure counseling, with Liptak specifically applying his leisure planning process (LPP) to preretirement counseling. Loesch and Burt (1980) advocated for leisure counseling for the elderly, and Loesch (1981) went on to advocate specifically for leisure counseling for older persons with disabilities. The person who did the most to operationalize avocational counseling with older persons with disabilities, however, was Overs (1975, 1977; Overs et al., 1972; Overs, Taylor, & Adkins, 1977), who developed a classification system for avocational activities, avocational interest card sorts, and an avocational counseling model for use with this population. Mirenda and Wilson (1975) indicated that Overs used the term “avocational” to refer to the application of this model and materials to persons with disabilities, whereas Wilson instead used the term “leisure” when applying this material to the general population. Overs’ term “avocational” seems better suited to the rehabilitation counseling context because of its etymological connection with the term “vocational,” which is a central concept in rehabilitation. Thus, both vocational and avocational activities imply work, with a principal difference between them being that avocational activities are generally, but not necessarily, unpaid.

Needed Counselor Knowledge and Attitudes

J. Wadsworth (2004) pointed out that rehabilitation counselors’ knowledge of the workplace, knowledge of disability, and commitment to inclusion can assist older adults with disabilities with maintaining employment. In addition, Finnerty-Fried (1985) noted that counselors may have to modify their beliefs about older persons and recognize their adaptability. All of this knowledge is applicable to retirement counseling and IPR development with this population. Bearden and Head (1986) found that rehabilitation professionals’ educational level was positively related to their knowledge about aging but negatively related to their degree of involvement with older persons. To prepare rehabilitation counselors to work with this rapidly expanding consumer cohort, Kampfe, Wadsworth, Smith, and Harley (2005) proposed adding information on aging issues to the rehabilitation counseling curriculum, particularly in the courses on principles of rehabilitation, medical and psychosocial aspects of disability, assessment, and career development and placement. Subsequently, they suggested methods and materials that could be used to achieve this goal (Kampfe, Harley, Wadsworth, & Smith, 2007). Familiarity with the information that they outlined is essential in assisting older consumers to plan their retirement.

Conclusion

This article has suggested that retirement planning be made a recognized part of rehabilitation plan development with older consumers. A broader question is whether rehabilitation counselors are uniquely qualified to provide retirement planning services to all older persons, including the non-disabled. Harsanyi (1970) raised the question of whether aging, per se, should be considered a disability. Barry (1980) argued for an affirmative answer to this question on the grounds that ageism presents a sufficiently pervasive and insurmountable barrier to justify providing rehabilitation services even if no other disabling condition is present. Whether or not the field chooses to provide retirement counseling for all older persons in our society, it cannot avoid taking on this role for those with disabilities. Hopefully, the concepts of the IPR and of RETIRE as a process of implementing it will help the profession meet its obligations to older consumers.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

AARP. (2004). Baby boomers envision retirement II—Key findings. Washington, DC: AARP Knowledge Management. Retrieved from http://assets.aarp.org/rgcenter/econ/boomers_envision_1.pdf

Atchley

R. C.

(1989). A continuity theory of normal aging. The Gerontologist, 29, 183–190.

Balandin

Llewellyn

Dew

Ballin

Schneider

(2006). Older disabled workers’ perceptions of volunteering. Disability & Society, 21, 677–692.

Barros-Bailey

Fischer

Saunders

J. L.

(2007). Age, work, and disability: Rehabilitation at the end of the work life. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 38(1), 20–31.

Barry

J. R.

(1980). Pro: Pro/con: Rehabilitation of the aging. Journal of Rehabilitation, 46(3), 50–54.

Bearden

L. J.

Head

D. W.

(1986). Attitudes of rehabilitation professionals toward aging and older persons. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 17(1), 17–19.

Berens

D. E.

Weed

R. O.

(2009). The role of the vocational rehabilitation counselor in life care planning. In Weed

R. O.

Berens

D. E.

(Eds.), Life care planning and case management handbook (3rd ed., pp. 41–61). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Bernacchio

McReynolds

Falvo

Stevens

Cimera

Hogan

(2009). Psychosocial characteristics of aging persons with psychiatric disabilities seeking VR. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 40(2), 5–12.

Beveridge

Craddock

S. H.

Liesener

Stapleton

Hershenson

(2002). INCOME: A framework for conceptualizing the career development of persons with disabilities. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 45, 195–206.

10.

Bozarth

J. D.

(1981). The rehabilitation process and older people. Journal of Rehabilitation, 47(4), 28–32.

11.

Brandon

(2012). 65-and-older population soars. Retrieved from http://money.usnews.com/money/retirement/articles/2012/01/09/65-and-older-population-soars

12.

Brault

M. W.

(2012). Americans with disabilities: 2010—Household Economic Studies (Current population reports). Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/p70-131.pdf

13.

Brown

P. L.

Roessler

R. T.

(1991). A job fair demonstration for senior citizens and people with disabilities. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 35, 82–90.

14.

Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System. (n.d.). Vocational rehabilitation counseling service programs. Retrieved from http://www.littlerock.va.gov/services/Vocational_Rehabilitation_Counseling_Service_Programs.asp

15.

Cordes

T. L.

Howard

R. W.

(2005). Concepts of work, leisure, and retirement in adults with an intellectual disability. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 40, 99–108.

16.

Cumming

Henry

W. E.

(1961). Growing old: The process of disengagement. New York, NY: Basic Books.

17.

Donaldson

Earl

J. K.

Muratore

A. M.

(2010). Extending the integrated model of retirement adjustment: Incorporating mastery and retirement planning. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77, 279–289.

18.

Doyle

R. H.

Dixon

C. G.

Moore

C. L.

(2003). Expanding rehabilitation services to meet the legal needs of aging Americans. Journal of Rehabilitation, 69(2), 49–54.

19.

Dunn

D. J.

(1981). Vocational rehabilitation of the older disabled worker. Journal of Rehabilitation, 47(4), 76–81.

20.

Feldman

D. C.

Beehr

T. A.

(2011). Three-phase model of retirement decision making. American Psychologist, 66, 193–203.

21.

Fesko

S. L.

Hall

A. C.

Quinlan

Jockell

(2012). Active aging for individuals with intellectual disability: Meaningful community participation through employment, retirement, service, and volunteerism. American Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 117, 497–508.

22.

Finnerty-Fried

(1985). Adapting rehabilitation counseling for older persons. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 29, 135–142.

23.

Finnerty-Fried

Myers

J. E.

Barry

J. R.

(1986). Rehabilitation of older persons disabled by cancer, stroke, and heart disease. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 29, 266–277.

24.

Ghilani

M. E.

(2014). Finding meaning and purpose in retirement: Work and non-work retirement options. Retrieved from http://www.ncda.org/aws/NCDA/pt/sd/news_article/87559/_PARENT/layout_details_cc/false

25.

Haber

(2006). Life review: Implementation, theory, research, and therapy. Aging & Human Development, 63, 153–171.

26.

Harper

M. C.

Shoffner

M. F.

(2004). Counseling for continued career development after retirement: An application of the theory of work adjustment. The Career Development Quarterly, 52, 272–284.

27.

Harsanyi

S. L.

(1970). Social attitudes regarding aging as a disability. Journal of Rehabilitation, 36(6), 24–27.

28.

Herbert

J. T.

Dambrocia

C. J.

(1989). Employability of older persons with disabilities: A partnership among employers, rehabilitation counselors, and potential workers. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 20(4), 16–21.

29.

Hillman

(2002). The role of work in the lives of retired men following stroke. Work, 19, 303–313.

30.

Hornstein

G. A.

Wapner

(1985). Modes of experiencing and adapting to retirement. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 21, 291–315.

31.

Jensen-Scott

R. L.

(1993). Counseling to promote retirement adjustment. The Career Development Quarterly, 41, 257–267.

32.

Kampfe

C. M.

Harley

D. A.

Wadsworth

J. S.

Smith

S. M.

(2007). Methods and materials for infusing aging issues into the rehabilitation curriculum. Rehabilitation Education, 21, 107–115.

33.

Kampfe

C. M.

Wadsworth

J. S.

Mamboleo

G. J.

Schonbrun

S. L.

(2008). Aging, disability, and employment. Work, 31, 337–344.

34.

Kampfe

C. M.

Wadsworth

J. S.

Smith

S. M.

Harley

D. A.

(2005). The infusion of aging issues in the rehabilitation curriculum: A review of the literature. Rehabilitation Education, 19, 225–233.

35.

Kemp

(1985). Rehabilitation and the older adult. In Birren

J. E.

Schaie

K. W.

(Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of aging (2nd ed., pp. 647–663). New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

36.

Kemp

Kleinplatz

(1985). Vocational rehabilitation of the older worker. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 39, 322–326.

37.

Kivnick

H. Q.

(1985). Disability and psychosocial development in old age. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 29, 123–134.

38.

Knapp

M. R.

(1977). The activity theory of aging: An examination in the English context. The Gerontologist, 17, 553–559.

39.

Laughlin

Cotten

P. D.

(1994). Efficacy of a pre-retirement planning intervention for ageing individuals with mental retardation. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 38, 317–328.

40.

Liptak

J. J.

(1990). Preretirement counseling: Integrating the leisure planning component. The Career Development Quarterly, 38, 360–367.

41.

Liptak

J. J.

(1991). Leisure counseling: An antidote for the living death. Journal of Employment Counseling, 28, 115–120.

42.

Liptak

J. J.

(2015). Career Exploration Inventory (5th ed.). St. Paul, MN: JIST Publishing.

43.

Llewellyn

Balandin

Dew

McConnell

(2004). Promoting healthy, productive ageing: Plan early, plan well. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 29, 366–369.

44.

Loesch

L. C.

(1981). Leisure counseling for disabled older persons. Journal of Rehabilitation, 47(4), 58–63.

45.

Loesch

L. C.

Burt

M. A.

(1980). Leisure counseling for the elderly: It’s time for a change. Counseling and Values, 24, 218–226.

46.

Maynard

(1974). Three theoretical aging frames of reference: Implications for a rehabilitation counselors’ model. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 5, 207–214.

47.

McCarthy

(2014). Cultivating our roots and extending our branches: Appreciating and marketing rehabilitation theory and research. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 57, 67–79.

48.

McVittie

Goodall

(2012). The ever-changing meanings of retirement. American Psychologist, 67, 75–77.

49.

Messer

M. A.

Greene

J. A.

Kovacs

A. M.

Holland

J. L.

(2013). SDS Leisure activities finder, Revised for the 5th Ed. Lutz, FL: PAR.

50.

Mirenda

J. J.

Wilson

G. T.

(1975). The Milwaukee leisure counseling model. Counseling and Values, 20, 42–46.

51.

Myers

J. E.

(1983). Rehabilitation counseling for older disabled persons: The state of the art. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 14(3), 48–53.

52.

Myers

J. E.

(1985). Using links to help older disabled persons with transitions. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 29, 143–149.

53.

Nevill

D. D.

Calvert

P. D.

(1996). Career assessment and the salience inventory. Journal of Career Assessment, 4, 399–412.

54.

Osborne

J. W.

(2012). Psychological effects of the transition to retirement. Canadian Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy, 46, 45–58.

55.

Overs

R. P.

(1975). Avocational counseling: Gateway to meaningful activity. Counseling and Values, 20, 36–41.

56.

Overs

R. P.

(1977). Avocational counseling. The Counseling Psychologist, 7(2), 85–88.

57.

Overs

R. P.

. (1972). Guide to avocational activities (Vol. II). Milwaukee, WI: Curative Workshop of Milwaukee. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED063704.pdf

58.

Overs

R. P.

Taylor

Adkins

(1977). Avocational counseling for the elderly. Journal of Physical Education and Recreation, 48(4), 44–45.

59.

Peevy

E. S.

(1984). Leisure counseling: Some emerging approaches. Journal of Career Development, 11, 81–89.

60.

Rasch

J. D.

(1979). A study on the feasibility of vocational rehabilitation for older clients. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 10(1), 28–31.

61.

Richardson

V. E.

(1993). Retirement counseling: A handbook for gerontology practitioners. New York, NY: Springer.

62.

Roessler

R. T.

(1989). Motivational factors influencing return to work. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 20(2), 14–17.

63.

Rogers

N. B.

Hawkins

B. A.

Eklund

S. J.

(1998). The nature of leisure in the lives of older adults with intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 42, 122–130.

64.

Roos

(2011). 10 best jobs for retirees. Retrieved from http://money.howstuffworks.com/second-career-ideas/10-best-jobs-for-retirees.htm

65.

Rowe

Kahn

(1997). Successful aging. The Gerontologist, 37, 433–440.

66.

Rusalem

(1963). The rehabilitation potential of older disabled workers. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 10, 56–60.

67.

Rusalem

Dill

(1961). Vocational rehabilitation of the older disabled person. Journal of Rehabilitation, 27(6), 17–20, 35, 38.

68.

Rusalem

(1981). The best is yet to be: Rehabilitation programming in a retirement community. Journal of Rehabilitation, 47, 72–75.

69.

Scherger

Nazroo

Higgs

(2011). Leisure activities and retirement: Do structures of Inequality change in old age? Ageing & Society, 31, 146–172.

70.

Schlossberg

N. K.

(2004). Retire smart, retire happy: Finding your true path in life. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

71.

Simon

(1995). Satisfaction with retirement: Vocational script development. Applied & Preventive Psychology, 4, 101–111.

72.

Sink

J. M.

Craft

(1981). Legislation affecting rehabilitation of older people: Present and future. Journal of Rehabilitation, 47(4), 85–89.

73.

Spitznagel

R. J.

Saxon

J. P.

(1995). Impact of client variables on the delivery of vocational evaluation and training services in the vocational rehabilitation process. Vocational Evaluation and Work Adjustment Bulletin, 28, 109–115.

74.

Sutton

E. S.

Park

H. L.

Schwartz

L. S.

(1993). Realities of retirement and pre-retirement planning. In Sutton

E. S.

Factor

A. R.

Hawkins

B. A.

Heller

Seltzer

G. B.

(Eds.), Older adults with developmental disabilities: Optimizing choice and change (pp. 95–106). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

75.

Taylor-Carter

M. A.

Cook

Weinberg

(1997). Planning and expectations of the retirement experience. Educational Gerontology, 23, 273–288.

76.

Ulrich

L. B.

Brott

P. E.

(2005). Older workers and bridge employment: Redefining retirement. Journal of Employment Counseling, 42, 159–170.

77.

Wadsworth

(2004). The participation of senior workers in vocational rehabilitation services. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 35(1), 10–15.

78.

Wadsworth

Kampfe

C. M.

(2004). The characteristics of senior applicants for vocational rehabilitation services. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 47, 104–111.

79.

Wadsworth

J. S.

Estrada-Hernandez

Kampfe

C. M.

Smith

S. M.

(2008). Economic outcome of employment for older participants in rehabilitation services funded by the Rehabilitation Services Administration. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 51, 107–117.

80.

Wadsworth

J. S.

Harper

D. C.

McLeran

H. E.

(1995). The transition from work to retirement among adults with mental retardation. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 26(3), 42–48.

81.

Wadsworth

J. S.

Smith

S. M.

Kampfe

C. M.

(2006). The use of age 65 as a data management strategy in rehabilitation research. Rehabilitation Education, 20, 213–220.

82.

Walker

J. W.

Kimmel

D. C.

Price

K. F.

(1981). Retirement style and retirement satisfaction: Retirees aren’t all alike. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 12, 267–281.

83.

Wang

Henkens

van Solinge

(2011). Retirement adjustment: A review of theoretical and empirical advancements. American Psychologist, 66, 204–213.

84.

Williams

M. G.

(1981). Independent living and older people. Journal of Rehabilitation, 47(4), 69–71.