Refusal to grow up and the absence of markers of maturation are described as more or less normative “delays” of mental and other development, and refusal of aging and the absence of corresponding markers are described as a certain, also temporary, partly desirable, but still “risky” phenomenon. In exploring this question, we are faced with another question: what kind of risks are meant, what and for whom appears and is (if it is) risky? The purpose of the study is to understand the mythology of “delayed aging” in the practice and theory of accompanying human development during adulthood. The research method is a theoretical analysis of the problems of “delayed aging” in the practice and theory of accompanying human development during adulthood. The mythology of “delayed aging” also plays a positive role in the practice and theory of accompanying human development during adulthood, and a negative role, like the well-known phenomenon of “vitauct”, which allows, on the one hand, to explain phenomena that do not fit into the normative scheme of aging, and, on the other hand, reflects the general reluctance of specialists to reconsider the very concept of aging and old age, its mechanisms and boundaries. This is manifested both in biomedical and socio-psychological and age-pedagogical studies. At the same time, a complex of data is ignored that aging, like growing up, is socioculturally normalized and, thus, “programmed” at the level of socio-psychological scenarios transmitted during upbringing and training, as well as subsequent human life through all existing channels and spheres of human relations. The mythology of “delayed aging” in modern practice and theory of accompanying human development during adulthood is one of the simulacra that makes it possible to describe the attempts of aging people to remain human and solve the problems of self-actualization as self-realization, despite the compulsion surrounding them to die after completing, to varying degrees, successful attempts at self-realization.