This FAQ is for people who are being told, directly or indirectly, that the only real route is online: book the appointment online, upload the document online, confirm the bank transfer in an app, read the health message in a portal, scan the code at the counter. Digital services can be useful. They can also become a barrier when they replace every other door.
The Ageing With Dignity Alliance starts from a simple position: older people are decision-makers. Support should make a choice possible, not take the choice away. The goal is support without surrender.
This article does not try to explain the whole problem of digital exclusion; Digital Dignity Lab covers that wider analysis. Here we focus on practical alternatives to insist on when an essential service becomes digital-only.
Was kann ich tun, wenn wichtige Dienste nur noch online erreichbar sind?
Start by naming the task, not the technology. Instead of arguing about whether you are “good with computers,” say what you need to do: submit a form, book an appointment, receive a decision, approve a payment, access a prescription, or speak to a person about an error.
Then ask for a non-digital or assisted route. Useful wording is calm and specific: “I need to complete this service, but I cannot use this portal independently. What telephone, paper, postal, or in-person route is available?” If the answer is simply “online only,” ask for that position in writing or ask the staff member to note it in your file.
Keep basic records of your attempts. Write down dates, times, office names, phone menus, error messages, and the names or roles of people you spoke with. You do not need a legal brief. You need a trail showing that you tried to use the service and were blocked by the route offered.
If a deadline is involved, say so early. “I am trying to meet a deadline, and the online route is not accessible to me. Please tell me how I can submit this another way.” If the issue is a benefits appeal or payment deadline, the Economic Security & Social Protection Centre is the better lane for the mechanics of that case.
Should essential services provide telephone or in-person alternatives?
Yes. Essential services should provide real alternatives, not symbolic ones. A phone number that never reaches a person is not a telephone route. A paper form that staff refuse to accept is not a paper route. A counter that sends everyone back to the website is not in-person access.
For public services, banking, healthcare administration, housing, utilities, and other essential areas, digital convenience for the provider should not become compulsory digital dependence for the user. In Germany and the EU, accessibility, data protection, consumer protection, and public-service duties all point toward the same practical principle: people should not lose access to essential decisions because they cannot use one digital tool.
A fair alternative may be a staffed phone line, an appointment desk, postal submission, assisted digital access in a private room, a paper form, or a trusted advice centre authorized to help without taking over. The important test is whether the alternative lets you complete the same task with reasonable dignity, timing, and privacy.
What about banks that require an app or online authentication?
Banking is one of the places where “just ask someone younger” can become risky. A relative may be kind, but a bank account holds private information, spending patterns, savings, debts, and sometimes family conflict. You should not have to disclose all of that to keep your own account usable.
Ask the bank what non-smartphone authentication options exist. Depending on the institution, there may be a card reader, telephone banking, branch assistance, paper statements, or other security methods. Do not accept a vague answer that implies the only choices are a new phone or a helper knowing your passwords.
Never give another person your full login details simply because the system is difficult. If you want someone to help with banking, ask the bank how support can be set up with clear limits. That may involve viewing documents together, using branch staff, or arranging formal authority. A Vorsorgevollmacht, meaning a power of attorney for future or current decision-making, is a serious legal tool, not a workaround for a bad app. Article 09 in this series explains advance planning in more detail.
How should healthcare portals work for people who do not want everything online?
Healthcare portals can help with appointments, prescriptions, results, messages, and records. They can also create anxiety when important information appears behind a login that is hard to use. Health information is intimate. A person may want help navigating the portal without wanting a child, neighbor, or volunteer to see diagnoses, medication, or test results.
Ask the practice, clinic, insurer, or pharmacy what offline route exists for the specific task. Can results be discussed by phone or in person? Can appointment letters be sent by post? Can prescriptions be handled without a portal? Can a staff member help you log in privately without seeing more than necessary?
For general patient rights, medical consent, and records access, Community Health Access Alliance is the better handoff. The AWDA point here is narrower: a health portal should not force an older person to surrender privacy in order to receive ordinary care.
How can older people get digital help without losing privacy?
Choose the smallest help that solves the problem. If you only need someone to show you where the “submit” button is, they do not need to read your whole form. If you only need a document scanned, they do not need your portal password. If you need a code entered, they do not need to keep the device afterward.
Set boundaries out loud before help begins: “Please sit beside me, not take over.” “I will type the password myself.” “Please look away while I read this message.” “I want help understanding the steps, not deciding for me.” A respectful helper will not be offended by clear boundaries.
Use trusted settings where possible: a public advice centre with privacy practices, a bank branch, a municipal service desk, a library digital support session with confidential spaces, or a community organization that understands data protection. Avoid giving sensitive information in a crowded room where others can overhear.
If a family member is helping, keep the same principle. Relatives are supporters second, not substitute owners of the decision. Support without surrender means the older person remains the person who decides what is opened, submitted, saved, deleted, and shared.
What should I watch for with scams?
Digital-only systems create openings for scams because people become used to urgent messages, codes, links, and warnings. Be careful with any message that says your account, pension, bank card, parcel, health record, or appointment will be lost unless you click immediately.
Do not share authentication codes with callers. Do not install remote-control software because someone says they are from a bank, authority, delivery company, or technical department. Do not move money to a “safe account.” If a message worries you, use a known route to contact the institution: a letter you already have, a bank card, or an official document. Do not use the contact details inside the suspicious message.
If you have already clicked, shared details, or sent money, act quickly and calmly. Contact the bank or service provider through a known route, change passwords where you can, and ask for help documenting what happened. The point is not shame. The point is containment.
What should accessible support include?
Accessible support is not only a ramp into a building. It includes clear language, enough time, large print, hearing support, screen-reader-compatible websites, saved progress, alternatives to timed codes, staff who can explain without rushing, and routes for people who do not own current devices.
Authentication should have more than one path. A person may not have a smartphone, may share a phone, may have tremor, may use a screen reader, may not receive text messages reliably, or may not be able to solve visual puzzles. Security matters, but security that locks out legitimate users is poorly designed.
Services should also provide receipts. If you submit a form, upload a file, attend an assisted session, or report that a portal failed, you should be able to receive confirmation. A person should not be left with no proof because the digital route broke.
What can I ask organizations to change?
Ask for alternatives that are concrete and measurable: a staffed phone line, paper forms on request, postal submission, in-person appointments for complex cases, private assisted digital sessions, accessible authentication, plain-language instructions, and confirmation of attempted submissions.
Ask who is responsible when the digital route fails. “If the portal does not work for me, who can receive the document another way?” “If I cannot use the app, how do I approve this securely?” “If I need help but do not want to share private information with family, what support do you provide?”
The wider design and policy debate belongs with Digital Dignity Lab. But as a user of an essential service, you can still insist on the basic standard: digital access should be one route, not the price of staying independent.