What a Pocket Talker Taught Me About Ageism: Reflections from the Ontario Legal Conference’s Elder Law Program

Do you know what a pocket talker is? I didn’t – until I attended the 2026 Ontario Legal Conference’s (OLC) Elder Law Program on February 3, 2026. That small device, a personal amplifier used to help people with hearing loss, became for me a powerful symbol of what the conference was really about: the simple, practical steps we can take to combat ageism in legal practice. It reminded me that sometimes the most effective tools are not complex legal arguments, but rather thoughtful accommodations that allow us to truly hear our clients. What follows are the key lessons I took away from the “Ageism Unraveled” session, featuring Nina Gandhi, acting deputy legal director at the Ontario Human Rights Commission; Graham Webb, executive director of the Advocacy Centre for the Elderly; and myself. Hannah Zip of Scotiabank moderated the panel.

These are insights that have reshaped my understanding of how age discrimination manifests in legal practice and how we can better serve our older clients.

Defining Ageism and Understanding the Scope of Ageist Harm

Ageism remains one of the most pervasive yet underappreciated forms of discrimination. As the World Health Organization has recognized, ageism encompasses “the stereotypes (how we think), prejudice (how we feel) and discrimination (how we act) towards others or ourselves based on age.” As Graham Webb explained, ageism is “diminishing and dehumanizing” and “can undermine the perception of the value and worth of a person.” Age discrimination touches nearly every facet of an older adult’s life: difficulty obtaining employment, denial of full rehabilitative care, and during the COVID-19 pandemic, draft protocols for life-saving treatment that would have effectively eliminated treatment of older adults. Recognizing the breadth of these issues is the first step toward building a compelling discrimination claim.

The Issue of Language Used to Refer to Older Adults

The terminology used to describe older adults can itself perpetuate ageist attitudes. “Seniors” can be perceived as patronizing and lacks a consistent age threshold across regulators. “Vulnerable persons” may suggest inherent weakness rather than situational circumstances. “Elderly” is often viewed as dated and pejorative, evoking images of frailty. Practitioners should be mindful of these linguistic nuances when drafting documents, communicating with clients, and advocating before tribunals.

Conflating Age with Incapacity

One critical lesson from the conference is that age must never be used as a proxy for mental capacity. Advanced age does not, in itself, diminish a person’s ability to make decisions; most community-dwelling older adults are mentally capable of making decisions about their own property and personal care. Even a medical diagnosis of dementia is not equivalent to a legally conclusive finding of incapacity – the legal tests are distinct and must be applied case by case. Moreover, older adults often have sensory impairments, such as hearing loss or vision problems, which are frequently mistaken for cognitive decline. Practitioners should investigate and apply the relevant legal tests of capacity, rather than relying on age-based assumptions.

Ageing and Ageism in the Financial Context: The Response of Financial Institutions

An extensive regulatory framework exists to protect older adults in the financial sector. The landscape spans federally regulated banks overseen by the FCAC and OSFI, investment and mutual fund dealers regulated by CIRO and provincial securities commissions, and provincially regulated credit unions and insurance companies under FSRA. Importantly, there is no single definition of “senior” or “vulnerable client” across regulators – thresholds range from age 60 to 65, with some using circumstances-based approaches with no specific age threshold. Key protective mechanisms include trusted contact person provisions, temporary holds on disbursements where there is reasonable belief of financial exploitation or lack of mental capacity and enhanced know-your-client obligations. Criminal and civil remedies are also available in cases of elder financial exploitation.

Practical Tools in Addressing Ageism

Know the Human Rights Framework

The Ontario Human Rights Code protects every person’s right to equal treatment with respect to services without discrimination on the basis of age or disability. Service providers – including lawyers – have a positive legal obligation to accommodate a person’s disability to the point of undue hardship. The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act further requires organizations to develop policies to achieve accessibility, including the removal of information or communications barriers. Lawyers pursuing age discrimination claims should be well versed in these overlapping statutory protections.

Prioritize Effective Communication

Poor communication can both cause age discrimination and undermine the pursuit of claims against it. Communication-related errors are among the biggest causes of professional liability claims across all areas of law. Nearly one-third of adults over 65 have hearing issues, and a quarter of those over 75 report vision problems. These sensory impairments are often mistaken for cognitive decline when the older adult simply cannot hear or see well enough to participate fully in a conversation. Practical accommodations, such as using a pocket talker, ensuring meeting spaces are quiet and well-lit, using large-font materials, and speaking in plain language, can dramatically improve a lawyer’s ability to take instructions. As Health Canada has observed, “senior-friendly communication is likely to be universally friendly.”

Ongoing, Deliberate Effort

Attending the 2026 OLC Elder Law Program fundamentally changed how I think about serving older clients. I learned that older adults are not generally mentally frail or incapable; they are not less worthy of dignity and respect; and they are capable of being credible witnesses. Most importantly, I learned that keeping ageism out of legal practice requires deliberate effort: making reasonable accommodations, employing effective communication strategies, and treating older clients with dignity. And when I think back to that conference, I return to the pocket talker – a simple device that reminds us that the barrier to effective communication with an older client is often not their capacity, but our failure to accommodate their needs.

Find more insights from February’s Ontario Legal Conference, by accessing programs on demand.