There is something faintly dystopian about the phrase “GPS trackers for the elderly”.
It conjures images of nan strapped to a lamppost in a fluorescent vest, blinking politely while satellites triangulate her position between Woolworths and the bowls club.
And yet – before we get too smug – consider this: thousands of older Australians are reported missing each year. Police data consistently shows that older people with dementia are among the most vulnerable. In Australia, more than 400,000 people live with dementia, and studies suggest that up to 60 per cent will wander at some point. When they do, the first 24 hours matter enormously.
So when a company like Life360 – the family location-sharing app you probably already use to check whether your grandson really is “on his way” – announces it is developing trackers for ageing parents, the question isn’t really “How dare they?”
It’s “Why didn’t this happen sooner?”
Life360 has just posted its first full-year profit – a rather eye-watering US$150.8 million – on revenues approaching half a billion dollars. Nearly 96 million people now use the platform each month. In Australia, penetration sits at about 14 per cent, which means one in seven of us is already voluntarily broadcasting our whereabouts to loved ones.
We are, in other words, halfway to tagging ourselves like migratory birds.
The app began as a way for families to see each other’s locations in real time. It has since added SOS alerts, roadside assistance, medical support, driving summaries and even pet tracking. Naturally, ageing parents are next.
CEO Lauren Antonoff says devices for older users are in development, though at least a year away. The aim is to bring elderly family members “into the ecosystem”.
Into the ecosystem. Like slightly bewildered penguins.
Here is the awkward bit.
If trackers are good for Grandma because she might wander, why aren’t they good for teenage boys, who wander spectacularly? Or middle-aged men who go hiking with “plenty of water” and return three days later via helicopter?
We already track children. Many families track each other. Some couples, rather ominously, track one another “for safety”.
The truth is this: we are no longer debating whether tracking is acceptable. We are debating who gets exempted.
And older people – particularly those over 70 with cognitive decline – are seen as the least controversial candidates. The argument is safety. Rapid response. Peace of mind. A way to prevent tragedy.
And it is a compelling argument.
Each year, Australian police handle tens of thousands of missing persons reports. While most are resolved quickly, older people with dementia are at significantly higher risk of harm. Heat, cold, traffic, disorientation. It is not dramatic to say lives could be saved.
But safety has a habit of quietly rearranging our understanding of freedom.
Independence vs reassurance
Ask anyone over 70 what they value and “independence” will sit very near the top. Not being a burden. Not being monitored like a suspicious Amazon parcel.
Would wearing a tracker feel reassuring? Or infantilising?
For families, the appeal is obvious. A map. A dot. Proof Mum made it to bridge. Proof Dad didn’t wander past the oval.
For the wearer, it may feel different.
The moral line seems to rest on consent. A tracker chosen freely is one thing. A tracker slipped into a handbag “just in case” is quite another.
And then there’s the philosophical wrinkle: if we normalise tracking older adults for safety, what stops it becoming standard for everyone?
After all, we already carry smartphones that track us relentlessly. Supermarkets know where we shop. Social media knows where we holiday. Your car probably reports more about you than your spouse does.
We are, largely, already traceable.
Here is the part no one says aloud: ageing frightens us. Losing someone – literally losing them – is one of our most primal fears.
If a small, discreet device can reduce that risk, many families will embrace it gratefully.
But perhaps the bigger conversation isn’t about technology at all. It’s about how we care for older Australians in a society where families are scattered, neighbours change yearly and community ties are thinner than they once were.
A tracker can tell you where someone is.
It cannot tell you why they felt the need to leave.
For people living with dementia who are at genuine risk of wandering, GPS tracking may well become a practical, life-saving tool.
For every mildly forgetful 72-year-old who simply takes the scenic route home? Perhaps less urgent.
The danger is not the technology. The danger is assuming that safety must always trump dignity.
And if we are honest, if trackers become normal for the elderly, they won’t stop there. Teenagers. Partners. Everyone.
We will all become dots on each other’s maps, blinking quietly in the great domestic ecosystem.
Which may be comforting.
Or it may be the moment we realise that being able to find everyone, all the time, is not quite the same thing as knowing them.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I appear to have wandered into the kitchen and forgotten why.
No tracker required – yet.
Proudly Australian owned and operated