Makes you wonder which is better and which is worse.
In my opinion, pay to fly is worse. At least with the pilot in waiting program you're earning a wage while working, even if most places have a lower pay rate for PIW than non-PIW employees. It still sucks, but it is the better evil of the two. I hope we never see pilot-paid type ratings or pay-to-fly programs here in Canada, and I believe that a union like ALPA would strongly oppose such a move should the government ever get it in its head that it's a good idea. Pilot bonds are another thing I'd like to see disappear, although I do understand the reason for those given I've directly seen why a company chose to institute a bond and the fallout that occured for the owners.
As for age, it's not as big a stumbling block as you may think. Not anymore at least. I've trained a lot of pilots at the airlines who were getting their start in their late-40's into their early-50's. Sure, if you got into an airline at 50, you'd never see left seat of a 787 or 777, but left seat of an A220, A320, or B737 is not out of the question, if that was your final goal. Certainly left seat of a Dash-8, CRJ, or other regional aircraft is well within reach starting out as late as 50....assuming the industry continues on its current trend that is.
Many, but not all, air operators now view age as a benefit, not a curse. Some will still require you to outline that fact for them though. But let me explain a bit. For one, people in their 30's and older bring a level of maturity and experience that those in their 20's do not. I've described it somewhere in another thread before, but I once trained a 40-something year old ER nurse who had emergency management and decision making skills well in excess of someone with equal flight time. She taught me a thing or two, and I was the one supposedly running the sim and teaching her! Second, as most major airlines experienced over the past 10-years, having half of your pilot group retire in a 5-to-10 year span because hiring a pilot older than 28 was a no-no back in the 80s and 90s is a bad business decision 20 to 30 years later. Now almost all air operators look for a mix of ages so that retirements happen on a more manageable scale down the road. I'm not saying take your time, but don't view age as a bad thing. It may require that you place a bit more emphasis on your transferable skills than on your flying. What did you learn in paramedicine, for example, that could help you during an emergency in an aircraft or help you with risk management? What did you learn in self defense that helps you quickly assess a situation and take a reasonable course of action? These would all be in a cover letter, not your resume, but try to focus there. Maybe the people who PFO'd you need a little help to see the value in your experiences.