Help

The Complexities of Elder Abuse

Karen A. Roberto Virginia Tech

Elder abuse is a growing societal concern, affecting at least 1 in 10 older Americans. Researchers and practitioners alike consistently assert that a dramatic discrepancy exists between the prevalence rates of elder abuse and the number of elder abuse cases reported. As a field of study, recognition and understanding of elder abuse is still emerging. Comparing findings of a small, but growing, body of literature on perceived and substantiated cases of elder abuse is challenging because there is no uniform term or agreed-upon definition used among state governments, researchers, health care and service providers, and advocates. This article summarizes current understanding of elder abuse, including what constitutes elder abuse, risk factors for elder abuse, perpetrators of elder abuse, and outcomes of elder abuse. Issues associated with the detection of elder abuse and intervention strategies for victims of abuse are addressed. In the final section, potential roles and contributions of psychologists for advancing elder abuse research, professional practice, and policy development are highlighted.

Keywords: elderly, detection, interventions, mistreatment, perpetrators

Since first identified in the mid-1970s as “granny bash- ing” (A. A. Baker, 1975), elder abuse has become a pressing concern throughout much of the world. Most recent esti- mates based on The National Elder Mistreatment Survey (Acierno, Hernandez-Tejada, Muzzy, & Steve, 2009) sug- gest that at least 10% of community-dwelling older adults in the United States, or approximately 4.3 million older per- sons, experience one or more forms of elder abuse annually (Kaplan & Pillemer, 2015). Prevalence rates among survey respondents were highest for self-reported financial abuse by a family member (5.2%), potential neglect by a caregiver (5.1%), and emotional abuse (4.5%). Substantially lower rates were found for self-reported physical abuse (1.6%) and sexual abuse (0.6%).

Researchers and practitioners alike consistently assert that a dramatic discrepancy exists between the actual prevalence of elder abuse and the number of elder abuse cases encoun- tered by health and service providers as well as criminal justice authorities. Underestimation of elder abuse occurs because older victims do not discuss their situation with

others and rarely report incidences to the authorities. For example, of the 4.5% of older adults in the national preva- lence study who reported experiencing emotional abuse, 8% of the individuals reported the event to the police (Acierno et al., 2009). Reasons older adults give for not disclosing abuse include embarrassment (Kosberg, 2014), belief that they are responsible for what happened (Moon & Benton, 2000), worry that the perpetrator might harm them even more (Ziminski Pickering & Rempusheski, 2014), fear of being placed in a nursing home (Jackson & Hafemeister, 2014), not believing that help is available if they expose the abuse (DeLiema, Navarro, Enguidanos, & Wilber, 2015), acceptance of a long-standing abusive situation as one that must be tolerated (Teaster, Roberto, & Dugar, 2006), and not recognizing their situation as an abusive one (Dakin & Pearlmutter, 2009). Community members’ reluctance to recognize elder abuse as a problem and hesitance to get involved, particularly when options for intervention are perceived to be lacking, also contributes to the underreport- ing of elder abuse (Roberto, Teaster, McPherson, Mancini, & Savla, 2015).

Acknowledging this widespread and growing social issue, the 2015 White House Conference on Aging (2015) in- cluded elder abuse, neglect, and financial exploitation as one of its four priority topics. The purpose of this article is threefold: (a) to summarize current understanding of elder abuse including what constitutes elder abuse, risk factors for elder abuse, perpetrators of elder abuse, and outcomes of elder abuse; (b) to describe current assessment and inter- vention strategies to address elder abuse; and (c) to identify

Editor’s note. This article is one of nine in the special issue, “Aging in America: Perspectives From Psychological Science,” published in American Psychologist (May–June 2016). Karen A. Roberto and Deborah A. DiGilio provided scholarly lead for the special issue.

Author’s note. Correspondence concerning this article should be ad- dressed to Karen A. Roberto, Center for Gerontology and Institute for Society, Culture and Environment, Virginia Tech, 230 Grove Lane (0555), Blacksburg, VA 24061. E-mail: [email protected]

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

American Psychologist © 2016 American Psychological Association 2016, Vol. 71, No. 4, 302–311 0003-066X/16/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0040259

302

gaps in and future directions for elder abuse research, pro- fessional practice, and policy development. Primary atten- tion is given to abuse of older adults living in the commu- nity. Elder abuse in long-term care settings (see Post et al., 2010) and elder self-neglect (see Dong, Simon, Mosqueda, & Evans, 2012), while of significant concern, are beyond the scope of this article.

Definitions of Elder Abuse

There is no consensus on the definition of elder abuse or standard term for elder abuse consistently used by the scientific and practice communities, advocates, or state and local governments. The lack of a uniformed definition of elder abuse stems back to when elder abuse first was being recognized and there were no federal mandates or incentives to compel states to use common definitions (Anetzberger, 2012). Although terms such as “elder abuse” (World Health Organization, 2002), “elder mistreatment” (Bonnie & Wal- lace, 2003), and “elder maltreatment” (World Health Orga- nization, 2011) are often used interchangeably, the param- eters of both the abuse and persons covered vary widely (Roberto, 2016). Such discrepancies create confusion in discriminating what is elder abuse, limits generalizing find- ings across studies, and prohibits identifying common courses for effective intervention (Henderson, Buchanan, & Fisher, 2002).

Regardless of terminology used, most definitions of elder abuse recognize five types of abuse: (a) physical abuse— use of physical force that may result in bodily injury, physical pain, or impairment; (b) sexual abuse—noncon- sensual sexual contact of any kind; (c) psychological and

emotional abuse—infliction of anguish, pain, or distress through verbal or nonverbal acts; (d) financial abuse and exploitation—illegal or improper use of an older person’s funds, property, or assets; and (e) neglect and abandon- ment—intentional or unintentional refusal or failure to ful- fill any part of a person’s obligations or caregiving duties to an older adult (American Psychological Association, 2012; Table 1). Current scientific investigations tend to address either one or more types of abuse collectively or narrowly focus on one specific subtype of abuse (e.g., psychological abuse, sexual abuse). Yet evidence embedded within the research literature and practitioner reports suggest that older adults often experience more than one type of abuse simul- taneously, that is, polyvictimization (Ramsey-Klawsnik & Heisler, 2014). In addition, behaviors associated with each type of abuse vary (National Center on Elder Abuse [NCEA], n.d.-b, Table 2) and are included selectively and inconsistently across studies of elder abuse.

Risk Factors Associated With Elder Abuse

A number of interacting factors contribute to a person’s vulnerability to abuse in late life, including age, gender, race, ethnicity, living arrangements, cultural beliefs and values, as well as physical and cognitive impairments, so- cial isolation, and loneliness. Much of the research on risk factors for elder abuse relies upon small, cross-sectional studies; does not include comparison groups; and does not differentiate type of abuse, identify discrete contributions of individual risk factors, or address how risk factors interacts to increase susceptibility to elder abuse (Roberto, 2016). As a result, empirical evidence for most risk factors for elder abuse is mixed (Johannesen & LoGiudice, 2013).

Age and Gender

National findings suggest that older adults aged 60 to 69 were more susceptible to abuse than older age groups (Aci- erno et al., 2009), whereas investigations focused on spe- cific types of abuse (i.e., financial) identified adults age 75 and older as being particularly susceptible to abuse (Metlife Mature Market Institute, 2011). One possible reason for the different findings is that younger old adults more often live with a spouse or with adult children, the two groups that are the most likely abusers (Lachs & Pillemer, 2015). Con- versely, living with a larger number of individuals other than a spouse is associated with an increased risk of abuse, especially financial abuse (Peterson et al., 2014). The asso- ciation between age and risk of abuse also may be linked to a decline in functional health, which often occurs later in life and results in a greater dependence on others for care and a higher level of individual vulnerability (Amstadter, Cisler, et al., 2011a).

Although women are more often identified as victims of elder abuse than are men (Laumann, Leitsch, & Waite,

Karen A. Roberto

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

303COMPLEXITIES OF ELDER ABUSE

2008), greater longevity resulting in associated age-related changes and dependencies may contribute to older women’s risk for abuse. The higher likelihood of experiencing family violence (Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence, 2009) may increase older women’s risk for abuse, particu- larly physical and sexual abuse (Acierno et al., 2010). Recently, Kosberg (2014) argued against a gender bias in elder abuse, stating that older men have been deemed “in- visible,” in part because of the failure of older men to acknowledge and report abuse. Research focused specifi- cally on elder abuse of older men (see Kosberg, 2007) suggests that elder abuse is not only a problem for older women—it adversely affects the lives of older men as well.

Race, Ethnicity, and Culture

Although racial or ethnic minority status is a frequently identified risk factor for elder abuse (Lachs, Williams, O’Brien, Hurst, & Horwitz, 1997), analysis of national data did not reveal significant race- and ethnicity-based differ- ences in the prevalence of abuse (Hernandez-Tejada, Am- stadter, Muzzy, & Acierno, 2013). Evidence exists that cultural norms and beliefs about abuse and tolerance for abusive behaviors intersect with race and ethnicity (Hors- ford, Parra-Cardona, Schiamberg, & Post, 2011; Moon & Benton, 2000) and socioeconomic status (Dakin & Pearl- mutter, 2009) to increase risk for elder abuse. Focus group

Table 2 Examples of Abusive Behaviors

Type of elder abuse Abusive behaviors

Physical abuse Hitting; slapping; pushing; shoving; kicking; pinching; burning; biting; beatings; restraining with ropes or chains Sexual abuse Unwanted touching; making the person look at pornography; forcing sexual contact with a third party; coerced

nudity; unwanted sexualized behavior; rape; sodomy Verbal/emotional/psychological Name calling; yelling, swearing, insulting, disrespectful, or threatening comments; threats; intimidation; isolating

the person from others Financial abuse/exploitation Misuse of funds; taking money under false pretenses; forgery; forced property transfers; purchasing expensive items

with the older person’s money without that person’s knowledge or permission; denying the older person access to his or her own funds; embezzlement

Caregiver neglect/abandonment Withholding appropriate attention; failure to provide food, water, clothing, medications, and assistance with activities of daily living; failing to meet the physical, social, or emotional needs of the older person

Note. Adapted from Types of Elder Abuse by the National Center on Elder Abuse (n.d.-b). Retrieved from http://www.ncea.aoa.gov/FAQ/Type_Abuse/ index.aspx.

Table 1 Types of Elder Abuse and Frequently Associated Indicators of Abuse

Type of elder abuse Indicators of elder abuse

Physical abuse Bruises or grip marks around the arms or neck Rope marks or welts on the wrists and/or ankles Repeated unexplained injuries Dismissive attitude or statements about injuries Refusal to go to same emergency department for repeated injuries

Verbal/emotional/psychological abuse Uncommunicative and unresponsive Unreasonably fearful or suspicious Lack of interest in social contacts Evasiveness or isolation Unexplained or uncharacteristic changes in behavior

Sexual abuse Unexplained vaginal or anal bleeding Torn or bloody underwear Bruised breasts or buttocks Venereal diseases or vaginal infections

Financial abuse/exploitation Life circumstances do not match what is known about the individual’s financial assets Large withdrawals from bank accounts, switching accounts, unusual ATM activity Signatures on checks do not match elder’s signature

Caregiver neglect Lack of basic hygiene, adequate food and water, or clean and appropriate clothing Sunken eyes or loss of weight Person with dementia left unsupervised Untreated pressure bed sores Lack of medical aids (glasses, walker, teeth, hearing aid, medications)

Note. Adapted from Elder Abuse and Neglect: In Search of Solutions by the American Psychological Association (2012). Retrieved from http://www .apa.org/pi/aging/resources/guides/elder-abuse.aspx.

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

304 ROBERTO

data revealed that African American and White older women with high socioeconomic status, as well as Latina older women, did not identify financial abuse as a type of elder abuse, whereas working-class White women did not identify verbal abuse as elder abuse (Dakin & Pearlmutter, 2009).

Cognitive Impairment

Cognitive impairment is perhaps the most agreed-upon risk factor for elder abuse. As cognitive abilities decline, the risk of all forms of elder abuse increases significantly (Dong, Simon, Rajan, & Evans, 2011). Financial capacity, defined as the ability to manage one’s financial affairs in a manner consistent with self-interest, begins to diminish very early in the trajectory of cognitive impairment (Okonkwo, Wadley, Griffith, Ball, & Marson, 2006), placing older adults at risk particularly for financial abuse and exploita- tion. Compromises in judgment and decision-making capac- ity and the tendency to judge others’ trustworthiness less stringently than younger individuals (Charles & Carstensen, 2010) may also increase older adults’ susceptibility to un- due influence, a tactic used by many perpetrators of elder abuse.

Social Support

Older adults’ positive perceptions of, and engagement with, their informal social network has the potential to reduce the influence of other risk factors of abuse (Luo & Waite, 2011). Perceptions of low social support more than triple the likelihood that older adults reported any form of abuse (Acierno et al., 2009). Social isolation and negative social interactions have been associated with increased risk of elder abuse (Dong & Simon, 2008; Fulmer et al., 2005), whereas positive social support and social participation moderated the risk of abuse (Luo & Waite, 2011). Most recently, Schafer and Koltai (2015) provided additional evidence for the significance of social embeddedness for deterring elder abuse. They found that older adults with dense social support in which members knew one another had a lower risk of elder abuse, even when perpetrators were found within these close networks.

Perpetrators of Elder Abuse

The relationships between older adults and potential per- petrators of elder abuse is often cited as a contributing factor leading up to abuse (Roberto, 2016). Older adults typically know their perpetrators, who are usually family members (e.g., spouse, adult child, grandchildren, nieces/nephews), friends, and others they trust and rely upon for help and services. Outsiders often perceive alleged perpetrators as primary sources of support for older adults rather than individuals who are causing them harm. Beyond basic de-

scriptive information, the empirical literature provides little information about perpetrators and their motivations for the abuse.

Spouse/partner abuse in late life can be viewed on a continuum from longstanding abuse within a single rela- tionship to abuse that begins with a new relationship in later life. It often involves multiple forms of abuse, including physical harm, sexual assault, and psychological humilia- tion or intimidation. In longstanding abusive relationships, physical violence tends to decline with age, often replaced with new or intensified types of psychological and emo- tional abuse endured in earlier years (Mezey, Post, & Max- well, 2002; Teaster et al., 2006). National prevalence stud- ies support this contention, with spouses/partners identified in one fourth or more of situations involving verbal or emotional abuse (Acierno et al., 2009).

Interdependencies within late-life parent– child relation- ships may place the older adult at risk for abuse. Adult children who are abusive are often dependent on their parents for shelter, finances, and emotional support (Jack- son & Hafemeister, 2012). Salient factors underlying de- pendency in adulthood includes addiction to alcohol, pain medications, or recreational drugs (Jogerst, Daly, Galloway, Zheng, & Xu, 2012); a history of mental or emotional illness (Acierno et al., 2009); and chronic unemployment (Jackson & Hafemeister, 2011). It is unlikely that any one of these factors precipitates elder abuse, but rather abuse within these relationships stems from a combination of multiple personal struggles. Conversely, when older persons are dependent on an adult child for their care, the potential for abuse also may escalate. The overwhelming majority of adult children provide appropriate care for their older par- ents; however, caregiving can become stressful and lead to potentially harmful or abusive behaviors (Amstadter, Zajac, et al., 2011b; Beach et al., 2005). However, compared with overwhelmed caregivers who often seek help to improve the situation, perpetrators with narcissistic and domineering personalities tend to be quick to espouse justifications for their abusive actions (Ramsey-Klawsnik, 2000).

Paid caregivers and other professionals in which a trust- ing relationship is expected (e.g., guardians, lawyers, in- vestment counselors) also are perpetrators of elder abuse. These perpetrators are good at cultivating relationships; they are charming and attentive, while waiting to take advantage of the trusting relationship they establish with the older person. For example, in cases of financial abuse and exploitation presented in the media (Metlife Mature Market Institute, 2011), some perpetrators purported that, in return for providing assistance and care for the older adult, they were entitled to additional compensation (e.g., money, pos- sessions). Other perpetrators had access to older adults’ money and assets, and when an occasion presented itself, they availed themselves to the older adults’ resources.

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

305COMPLEXITIES OF ELDER ABUSE

Outcomes of Elder Abuse

Elder abuse, in all its forms, has a profound impact on the health and psychological well-being of late-life victims. Al- though some markers of elder abuse are instantly obvious, such as injuries ranging from bruises and sprains, to broken bones and lost teeth, to severe brain trauma (Friedman, Avila, Tanouye, & Joseph, 2011), older victims often experience numerous adverse health effects that may not be immediately evident and persist long after the abuse has stopped (Bonomi, Anderson, Rivara, & Thompson, 2007). The long-term effects of elder abuse include new or exacerbated health problems and hospitalizations (Dong & Simon, 2013), premature institution- alization (Rovi, Chen, Vega, Johnson, & Mouton, 2009), and a hastened death (M. W. Baker et al., 2009; Dong et al., 2011).

The impact of sexual abuse, perhaps the most egregious and underreported type of elder abuse (Teaster & Roberto, 2004), has received less attention in the research literature than other types of abuse. In addition to the physical rem- nants of being sexually abused (e.g., genital injuries; human bite marks; bruising on the thighs, buttocks, breasts), older sexual abuse victims often exhibited substantial psychoso- cial indicators of trauma, including symptoms of posttrau- matic stress disorder (Ramsey-Klawsnik, 2004). Bonomi et al. (2007) found that sexual intimate-partner violence expo- sure, alone or in combination with physical abuse, resulted in numerous adverse health effects that “persisted for many years after the abuse stopped” (p. 993), including a high likelihood of depression and poor social and mental func- tioning.

Psychological and emotional abuse is one of the most underreported yet damaging forms of elder abuse. The in- tangible nature of psychological abuse makes it difficult to quantify and often means it goes unrecognized, even by older victims themselves. Older adults who experience chronic emotional mistreatment often internalize their abus- er’s verbal aggression, which leads to increased physical health symptoms and behaviors indicative of anxiety and depression (Begle et al., 2011). While acknowledging that physical and sexual abuse impact victims’ psychological health, Cisler, Begle, Amstadter, and Acierno (2012) sug- gested that emotional abuse may have a more potent and direct effect on mental health. Accounting for other known correlates of poor mental health in late life, they found psychological mistreatment to be a significant predictor of late-life negative emotional symptoms and functional im- pairment.

Often referred to as the “Crime of the 21st Century,” financial abuse and exploitation costs older Americans nearly 3 billion dollars annually (Metlife Mature Market Institute, 2011). But the loss of financial resources and valued possessions of older victims extend far beyond the savings and material goods that are not easily recouped late in life. Financial abuse and exploitation “engenders health

care inequities, fractures families, reduces available health care options . . . increases rates of mental health issues among elders [and] . . . invariably results in losses of human rights and dignity” (Metlife Mature Market Institute, 2011, p. 4).

Detection of Elder Abuse

Psychologists and others working in clinical practice of- ten struggle with identifying whether an older client has experienced abuse and when to report suspected abuse (Mosqueda & Olsen, 2015). To date, there is no single gold-standard test to ascertain abuse, with numerous tools employed by both researchers and clinicians. A review of 26 empirical articles found that modified versions of the Con- flict Tactics Scale (CTS; Straus, 1979) was the most com- monly used measure to identify elder abuse (Sooryanarayana, Choo, & Hairi, 2013). The CTS has strong psychometric properties and focuses on the use of negotiation, physical assault, and psychological aggression in relationships. Re- views of measures for use primarily in clinical practice (An- thony, Lehning, Austin, & Peck, 2009; Fulmer, Guadagno, Bitondo Dyer, & Connolly, 2004; Pisani & Walsh, 2012) identified a number of screening and assessment instruments, none of which have gained widespread use. Moreover, the reliability and validity of most of the measures identified has yet to be established (Cooper, Selwood, & Livingston, 2008). Taking a more informal approach, Mosqueda and Olsen (2015) suggested that psychologists and other health care providers ask their older clients whom they suspect may be involved in an abusive situation a series of questions (e.g., “Are you afraid of anyone?” or “Is anyone mistreating you?”). The client’s response will help clinicians determine the need to report suspected abuse or to pursue another course of ther- apeutic action (Zeranski & Halgin, 2011).

As mandatory reporters in most states—and in keeping with the American Psychological Association’s (2010) eth- ics code’s general principles of beneficence and nonmalefi- cence, and respect for people’s rights and dignity—psychol- ogists are responsible to report suspected elder abuse when they have “reasonable” cause to believe that an older adult is experiencing abuse or neglect (p. 296). However, the decision to take action and report any suspected case of elder abuse is a challenging balancing act between protect- ing the clients’ personal well-being and respecting their dignity and self-determination to make their own decisions about their lives (Scheiderer, 2012; Zeranski & Halgin, 2011).

Once a report of suspected abuse is made, psychologists are not responsible for identifying ways in which to remedy the situation, but they do have continued responsibility to their client regardless if the client is the victim, perpetrator, or other party involved in the situation (Mosqueda & Olsen, 2015). Psychologists must strive to preserve the therapeutic

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

306 ROBERTO

relationship while taking action to protect the vulnerable older adult (Zeranski & Halgin, 2011). Although reporting suspected abuse is a legally mandated breach of confiden- tiality, determining if anyone else (e.g., client, family mem- ber) should be informed requires careful consideration (Mosqueda & Olsen, 2015).

Elder Abuse Interventions

Whenever a potential abusive situation is identified, ei- ther by the victim or by a third party, in most states, Adult Protective Services (APS) is the principle public agency responsible for investigating the situation occurring in the community (NCEA, n.d.-a). When APS receives a report of elder abuse, workers investigate and, if warranted, take action to ameliorate the situation with legal, medical, psy- chological, and social services. In nonemergency cases, APS cannot investigate alleged abuse without consent from the older individual or his or her caregiver or legal guardian, a court order, or a search warrant (Roby & Sullivan, 2001). If consent is denied, APS can petition the court for assis- tance upon showing of probable cause. Once abuse is sub- stantiated, APS provides overall management of the case along with law enforcement and, in some cases, the judi- ciary system. Immediate response to the abusive situation may involve removing either the older victim or the perpe- trator from the home and securing medical care, supportive services, and mental health services.

Mental Health Services

Once the situation is stabilized, older victims who are receptive to receiving help may benefit from psychological interventions to address the trauma, anxiety, and stress associated with abuse. A recent pilot study provided pre- liminary evidence for the feasibility of providing evidence- based psychotherapy for anxiety and depression at the same time that older adults were receiving mistreatment resolu- tion services (Sirey et al., 2015). Most eligible clients (69 of 81; 85%) were willing to accept mental health services.

Therapeutic interventions used for postabuse treatment of elder abuse have included individual counseling, psychoe- ducational support groups, case management, and volunteer victim assistance services (Ploeg, Fear, Hutchison, Mac- Millan, & Bolan, 2009). Early studies often reported no differences between treatment and control groups, and in some cases, interventions were reported to have negative impacts for older victims (Davis & Medina-Ariza, 2001). Differences also have been reported in the effectiveness for different modes of intervention. For example, approxi- mately 67% of older victims who received individual coun- seling primarily for psychological abuse self-reported im- provements in their ability to cope with their situation, whereas no change was reported for 31% of the older adults;

deterioration occurred for less than 2% of the participants (Alon & Berg-Warman, 2014). Conversely, 50% of support group participants self-reported better coping abilities, whereas the other participants did not. Methodological is- sues may explain some of the mixed findings across and within studies, including inclusion of small, selective sam- ples; limited use of rigorously designed randomized clinical trials; lack of established and agreed upon outcome mea- sures; and use of descriptive and bivariate evaluation strat- egies (Ploeg et al., 2009).

Multidisciplinary Teams

Many communities have created multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) comprising local professionals (e.g., physicians, social workers, law enforcement, APS workers) to work with, or on behalf of, older victims. Such teams offer an integrative and holistic approach to elder abuse by actively engaging multiple professional disciplines and perspectives in the prevention and intervention process. The primary function of MDTs is to offer expert consultation to service providers, identify service gaps and systems problems, ad- vocate for change, provide training events, and coordinate investigations or care planning (Teaster, Nerenberg, & Stansbury, 2003). Although published information about MDTs is mostly anecdotal and descriptive, a recent empir- ical evaluation of a multidisciplinary model suggested that these models are indeed effective (Rizzo, Burnes, & Chalfy, 2015). Specifically, an examination of 250 randomly se- lected cases of elder abuse found that older adults’ gender (female), marital status (married), and living arrangement (living with the perpetrator) were significant covariate pre- dictors of unfavorable mistreatment status at case closure. Taking these variables into account, older persons who received intervention services from an integrated legal and social services team compared with outcomes of a social- work-only intervention had a greater reduction in mistreat- ment risk at case closure.

State and National Initiatives

State and national initiatives also have implemented in- terventions to prevent and alleviate elder abuse, yet vary considerably according to state and federal priorities. For example, the AARP Foundation’s Elder Watch Colorado (AARP Foundation, n.d.) is a program in which the Attor- ney General Office addresses financial exploitation by pro- viding information to, and coordinating efforts by, the state’s law enforcement offices, adult protection and mental health agencies, and service organizations assisting older adults. With support from the Administration for Commu- nity Living’s Administration on Aging unit, the NCEA (Administration for Community Living, n.d.) serves as a national resource center dedicated to the prevention of elder

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

307COMPLEXITIES OF ELDER ABUSE

abuse, and operates as a multidisciplinary consortium of collaborators with expertise in elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation. The NCEA disseminates information to pro- fessionals and the public about elder abuse, and it provides technical assistance and training opportunities for profes- sionals. The Training Resources on Elder Abuse (USC Department of Family Medicine and Geriatrics and the NCEA, n.d.) is a searchable web-based database of elder- abuse-related training materials. It features a variety of materials and resources created by organizations throughout the country, including a library of videos appropriate for training purposes.

Federal legislation and policy initiatives also have been put forth to support intervention efforts to prevent and respond to elder abuse. The most comprehensive federal bill to shed light on interventions for elder abuse is the Elder Justice Act of 2009 (2010). The intent of the Elder Justice Act intent is to provide federal resources to prevent, detect, treat, understand, intervene in, and, when appropriate, pros- ecute elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation. Specifically, the act provides for the establishment of the Elder Justice Coordinating Council, an advisory board, and forensic cen- ters, as well as funding for improvements to long-term care, APS, and the long-term care ombudsman program. In 2014, the Departments of Justice and the Department of Health and Human Services issued the Elder Justice Roadmap (Departments of Justice & Department of Health and Hu- man Services, 2014). Developed with input from hundreds of public and private stakeholders from across the country, this first national strategic plan for elder justice identifies the most critical direct services, education, policy, and re- search priorities and concrete opportunities for greater pub- lic and private investment and engagement in elder abuse issues.

New Directions for Psychological Science and Practice in Elder Abuse

Eradicating elder abuse requires multiple solutions—it needs to be a priority of psychologists working together on interven- tion efforts utilizing multiple players (e.g., general public, professional communities, government policymakers) in mul- tiple settings (i.e., community, long-term care facilities). To date, elder abuse research has been hampered by methodolog- ical issues and other challenges associated with the complexity of elder abuse, including human subject protection rules, man- datory reporting obligations, participant access and recruit- ment, agency cooperation, and a paucity of federal and private funding (Pillemer et al., 2011).

To develop effective elder abuse preventive measures and intervention programs and services requires researchers and practitioners from the psychological sciences need to band together and collaborate with members of other disciplines.

It will take concerted and sustained efforts from all profes- sionals in the elder abuse space to resolve these issues and:

1. Develop a universally accepted definition of what constitutes elder abuse that will provide greater un- derstanding of the magnitude of elder abuse. Age needs to be considered as part of the definition. There currently is no standard age parameters for elder abuse, which impedes both the generalization of knowledge generated and the delivery of services.

2. Disentangle the individual, relational, cultural, and societal factors that place older adults at risk for elder abuse, particularly for ethnic and racial minority el- ders and other vulnerable groups (e.g., rural elders, older adults with cognitive impairment, frail elders), and identify the pathways of not only vulnerability for abuse but also protective factors that prevent elder abuse from occurring. Without meaningful risk factor data, the development of intervention strategies will languish.

3. Expand efforts to increase understanding about the perpetrators of elder abuse beyond demographic char- acteristics and descriptions of personal behaviors. This information is needed in order to develop, im- plement, and evaluate intervention protocols. Ulti- mately, reducing elder abuse requires better identifi- cation and treatment of its perpetrators.

4. Document the full range of costs and consequences of elder abuse for older adults, families, communities, and the nation. Elder abuse threatens the physical, psychological, social, and economic well-being of all involved, individually and collectively. But without documentation of the outcome of abuse, efforts to eliminate elder abuse will remain elusive.

5. Gather comprehensive, evidence-based data to deter- mine which intervention strategies work best for spe- cific groups of older adults and the cost-effectiveness of current and newly developed programs. This in- formation is essential not only for older persons who experience abuse, but for the training of new clini- cians and practitioners and for advocates seeking state and federal support for their implementation.

References

2015 White House Conference on Aging. (2015). The 2015 White House Conference on Aging Final Report. Retrieved from http://www. whitehouseconferenceonaging.gov

AARP Foundation. (n.d.). AARP Foundation ElderWatch. Retrieved from http://www.aarp.org/aarp-foundation/our-work/income/elderwatch.html

Acierno, R., Hernandez, M. A., Amstadter, A. B., Resnick, H. S., Steve, K., Muzzy, W., & Kilpatrick, D. G. (2010). Prevalence and correlates of emotional, physical, sexual, and financial abuse and potential neglect in

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

308 ROBERTO

the United States: The National Elder Mistreatment Study. American Journal of Public Health, 100, 292–297. http://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH .2009.163089

Acierno, R., Hernandez-Tejada, M., Muzzy, W., & Steve, K. (2009). National Elder Mistreatment Study. U. S. Department of Justice. Re- trieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/226456.pdf

Administration for Community Living. (n.d.). National Center on Elder Abuse (Title II). Retrieved from http://www.aoa.acl.gov/AoA_Programs/ Elder_Rights/NCEA/index.aspx

Alon, S., & Berg-Warman, A. (2014). Treatment and prevention of elder abuse and neglect: Where knowledge and practice meet-a model for intervention to prevent and treat elder abuse in Israel. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 26, 150 –171. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08946566 .2013.784087

American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical principles of psy- chologists and code of conduct. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ ethics/code/

American Psychological Association. (2012). Elder abuse and neglect: In search of solutions. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/pi/aging/ resources/guides/elder-abuse.aspx

Amstadter, A. B., Cisler, J. M., McCauley, J. L., Hernandez, M. A., Muzzy, W., & Acierno, R. (2011). Do incident and perpetrator characteristics of elder mistreatment differ by gender of the victim? Results from the National Elder Mistreatment Study. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 23, 43–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08946566.2011.534707

Amstadter, A. B., Zajac, K., Strachan, M., Hernandez, M. A., Kilpatrick, D. G., & Acierno, R. (2011). Prevalence and correlates of elder mis- treatment in South Carolina: The South Carolina Elder Mistreatment Study. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26, 2947–2972. http://dx.doi .org/10.1177/0886260510390959

Anetzberger, G. J. (2012). An update on the nature and scope of elder abuse. Generations, 36(3), 12–20.

Anthony, E. K., Lehning, A. J., Austin, M. J., & Peck, M. D. (2009). Assessing elder mistreatment: Instrument development and implications for adult protective services. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 52, 815– 836. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01634370902918597

Baker, A. A. (1975). Granny bashing. Modern Geriatrics, 5, 20 –24. Baker, M. W., LaCroix, A. Z., Wu, C., Cochrane, B. B., Wallace, R., &

Woods, N. F. (2009). Mortality risk associated with physical and verbal abuse in women aged 50 to 79. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 57, 1799 –1809. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2009 .02429.x

Beach, S. R., Schulz, R., Williamson, G. M., Miller, L. S., Weiner, M. F., & Lance, C. E. (2005). Risk factors for potentially harmful informal caregiver behavior. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 53, 255–261. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53111.x

Begle, A. M., Strachan, M., Cisler, J. M., Amstadter, A. B., Hernandez, M., & Acierno, R. (2011). Elder mistreatment and emotional symptoms among older adults in a largely rural population: The South Carolina elder mistreatment study. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26, 2321– 2332. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0886260510383037

Bonnie, R. J., & Wallace, R. B. (2003). Elder mistreatment: Abuse, neglect and exploitation in an aging America. Washington, DC: National Re- search Council.

Bonomi, A. E., Anderson, M. L., Rivara, F. P., & Thompson, R. S. (2007). Health outcomes in women with physical and sexual intimate partner violence exposure. Journal of Women’s Health, 16, 987–997. http://dx .doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2006.0239

Charles, S. T., & Carstensen, L. L. (2010). Social and emotional aging. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 383– 409. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/ annurev.psych.093008.100448

Cisler, J. M., Begle, A. M., Amstadter, A. B., & Acierno, R. (2012). Mistreatment and self-reported emotional symptoms: Results from the

National Elder Mistreatment Study. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 24, 216 –230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08946566.2011.652923

Cooper, C., Selwood, A., & Livingston, G. (2008). The prevalence of elder abuse and neglect: A systematic review. Age and Ageing, 37, 151–160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afm194

Dakin, E., & Pearlmutter, S. (2009). Older women’s perceptions of elder maltreatment and ethical dilemmas in adult protective services: A cross- cultural, exploratory study. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 21, 15–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08946560802571896

Davis, R. C., & Medina-Ariza, J. (2001). Results from an elder abuse prevention experiment in New York City. National Institute of Justice. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/188675.pdf

DeLiema, M., Navarro, A., Enguidanos, S., & Wilber, K. (2015). Voices from the frontlines: Examining elder abuse from multiple professional perspectives. Health & Social Work, 40, 15–24. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1093/hsw/hlv012

Departments of Justice & Department of Health and Human Services. (2014). Elder justice roadmap. Retrieved http://www.justice.gov/ elderjustice/research/resources/EJRP_Roadmap.pdf

Dong, X., & Simon, M. A. (2008). Is greater social support a protective factor against elder mistreatment? Gerontology, 54, 381–388. http://dx .doi.org/10.1159/000143228

Dong, X., & Simon, M. A. (2013). Elder abuse as a risk factor for hospitalization in older persons. Journal of the American Medical As- sociation Internal Medicine, 173, 911–917. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/ jamainternmed.2013.238

Dong, X., Simon, M. A., Beck, T. T., Farran, C., McCann, J. J., Mendes de Leon, C. F., . . . Evans, D. A. (2011). Elder abuse and mortality: The role of psychological and social wellbeing. Gerontology, 57, 549 –558. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1159/000321881

Dong, X., Simon, M. A., Mosqueda, L., & Evans, D. A. (2012). The prevalence of elder self-neglect in a community-dwelling population: Hoarding, hygiene, and environmental hazards. Journal of Aging and Health, 24, 507–524. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0898264311425597

Dong, X., Simon, M., Rajan, K., & Evans, D. A. (2011). Association of cognitive function and risk for elder abuse in a community-dwelling population. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 32, 209 –215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000334047

Elder Justice Act of 2009 (Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2011-2045 (2010).

Friedman, L. S., Avila, S., Tanouye, K., & Joseph, K. (2011). A case- control study of severe physical abuse of older adults. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 59, 417– 422. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j .1532-5415.2010.03313.x

Fulmer, T., Guadagno, L., Bitondo Dyer, C., & Connolly, M. T. (2004). Progress in elder abuse screening and assessment instruments. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 52, 297–304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ j.1532-5415.2004.52074.x

Fulmer, T., Paveza, G., VandeWeerd, C., Fairchild, S., Guadagno, L., Bolton-Blatt, M., & Norman, R. (2005). Dyadic vulnerability and risk profiling for elder neglect. The Gerontologist, 45, 525–534. http://dx.doi .org/10.1093/geront/45.4.525

Henderson, D., Buchanan, J. A., & Fisher, J. E. (2002). Violence and the elderly population: Issues for prevention. In P. A. Schewe (Ed.), Pre- venting violence in relationships: Interventions across the life span (pp. 223–245). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/10455-009

Hernandez-Tejada, M., Amstadter, A., Muzzy, W., & Acierno, R. (2013). The national elder mistreatment study: Race and ethnicity findings. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 25, 281–293. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1080/08946566.2013.770305

Horsford, S. R., Parra-Cardona, J. R., Schiamberg, L., & Post, L. A. (2011). Elder abuse and neglect in African American families: Informing prac- tice based on ecological and cultural frameworks. Journal of Elder

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

309COMPLEXITIES OF ELDER ABUSE

Abuse & Neglect, 23, 75– 88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08946566.2011 .534709

Jackson, S. L., & Hafemeister, T. L. (2011). Financial abuse of elderly people vs. other forms of elder abuse: Assessing their dynamics, risk factors, and society’s response. Rockville, MD: U. S. Department of Justice.

Jackson, S. L., & Hafemeister, T. L. (2012). Pure financial exploitation vs. hybrid financial exploitation co-occurring with physical abuse and/or neglect of elderly persons. Psychology of Violence, 2, 285–296. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0027273

Jackson, S. L., & Hafemeister, T. L. (2014). How case characteristics differ across four types of elder maltreatment: Implications for tailoring inter- ventions to increase victim safety. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 33, 982–997. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0733464812459370

Jogerst, G. J., Daly, J. M., Galloway, L. J., Zheng, S., & Xu, Y. (2012). Substance abuse associated with elder abuse in the United States. The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 38, 63– 69. http://dx.doi .org/10.3109/00952990.2011.600390

Johannesen, M., & LoGiudice, D. (2013). Elder abuse: A systematic review of risk factors in community-dwelling elders. Age and Ageing, 42, 292–298. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afs195

Kaplan, D. B., & Pillemer, K. (2015). Fulfilling the promise of the Elder Justice Act: Priority goals for the White House Conference on Aging. Public Policy & Aging Report, 25, 63– 66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ ppar/prv001

Kosberg, J. I. (2014). Rosalie Wolf Memorial Lecture: Reconsidering assumptions regarding men as elder abuse perpetrators and as elder abuse victims. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 26, 207–222. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1080/08946566.2014.898442

Kosberg, J. I. (Ed.). (2007). Abuse of older men. Binghamton, NY: Haworth Maltreatment & Trauma Press.

Lachs, M. S., & Pillemer, K. A. (2015). Elder abuse. The New England Journal of Medicine, 373, 1947–1956. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/ NEJMra1404688

Lachs, M. S., Williams, C., O’Brien, S., Hurst, L., & Horwitz, R. (1997). Risk factors for reported elder abuse and neglect: A nine-year observa- tional cohort study. The Gerontologist, 37, 469 – 474. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1093/geront/37.4.469

Laumann, E. O., Leitsch, S. A., & Waite, L. J. (2008). Elder mistreatment in the United States: Prevalence estimates from a nationally representa- tive study. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B: Psychological Sci- ences and Social Sciences, 63, S248 –S254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ geronb/63.4.S248

Luo, Y., & Waite, L. J. (2011). Mistreatment and psychological well-being among older adults: Exploring the role of psychosocial resources and deficits. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 66B, 217–229. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/geronb/ gbq096

MetLife Mature Market Institute. (2011). The MetLife study of elder financial abuse: Crimes of occasion, desperation and predation against America’s elders. Retrieved from http://www.metlife.com/assets/cao/ mmi/publications/studies/2011/mmi-elder-financial-abuse.pdf

Mezey, N. J., Post, L. A., & Maxwell, C. D. (2002). Redefining intimate partner violence: Women’s experiences with physical violence and non- physical abuse by age. The International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 22, 122–154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01443330210790120

Moon, A., & Benton, D. (2000). Tolerance of elder abuse and attitudes toward third-party intervention among African American, Korean Amer- ican, and White elderly. Journal of Multicultural Social Work, 8, 283– 303. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J285v08n03_05

Mosqueda, L., & Olsen, B. (2015). Elder abuse and neglect. In P. Lich- tenberg & B. T. Mast (Eds.), APA handbook of clinical geropsychology, Vol. 2: Assessment, treatment, and issues of later life (pp. 667– 686).

Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. http://dx.doi .org/10.1037/14459-026

National Center on Elder Abuse. (n.d.-a). Adult protective services. Re- trieved from www.ncea.aoa.gov/Stop_Abuse/Partners/APS/index.aspx

National Center on Elder Abuse. (n.d.-b). Types of elder abuse. Retrieved from http://www.ncea.aoa.gov/FAQ/Type_Abuse/index.aspx

Okonkwo, O. C., Wadley, V. G., Griffith, H. R., Ball, K., & Marson, D. C. (2006). Cognitive correlates of financial abilities in mild cognitive impairment. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 54, 1745–1750. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2006.00916.x

Peterson, J. C., Burnes, D. P., Caccamise, P. L., Mason, A., Henderson, C. R., Jr., Wells, M. T., . . . Lachs, M. S. (2014). Financial exploitation of older adults: A population-based prevalence study. Journal of Gen- eral Internal Medicine, 29, 1615–1623. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s11606-014-2946-2

Pillemer, K., Breckman, R., Sweeney, C. D., Brownell, P., Fulmer, T., Berman, J., . . . Lachs, M. S. (2011). Practitioners’ views on elder mistreatment research priorities: Recommendations from a Research-to- Practice Consensus conference. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 23, 115–126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08946566.2011.558777

Pisani, L. D., & Walsh, C. A. (2012). Screening for elder abuse in hospitalized older adults with dementia. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 24, 195–215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08946566.2011.652919

Ploeg, J., Fear, J., Hutchison, B., MacMillan, H., & Bolan, G. (2009). A systematic review of interventions for elder abuse. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 21, 187–210. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08946560902997181

Post, L., Page, C., Conner, T., Prokhorov, A., Fang, Y., & Biroscak, B. J. (2010). Elder abuse in long-term care: Types, patterns, and risk factors. Research on Aging, 32, 323–348. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 0164027509357705

Ramsey-Klawsnik, H. (2000). Elder-abuse offenders: A typology. Gener- ations, 24(2), 17–22.

Ramsey-Klawsnik, H. (2004). Elder sexual abuse within the family. Jour- nal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 15, 43–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/ J084v15n01_04

Ramsey-Klawsnik, H., & Heisler, C. (2014)., May/June). Polyvictimiza- tion in later life. Victimization of the Elderly and Disabled, 17, 15–16.

Rizzo, V. M., Burnes, D., & Chalfy, A. (2015). A systematic evaluation of a multidisciplinary social work-lawyer elder mistreatment intervention model. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 27, 1–18. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1080/08946566.2013.792104

Roberto, K. A. (2016). Abusive relationships in late life. In L. K. George & K. F. Ferraro (Eds.), Handbook of aging and the social sciences (8th ed., pp. 337–355). New York, NY: Elsevier/Academic. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/B978-0-12-417235-7.00016-0

Roberto, K. A., Teaster, P. B., McPherson, M., Mancini, J. A., & Savla, J. (2015). A community capacity framework for enhancing a criminal justice response to elder abuse. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38, 9 –26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0735648X.2013.804286

Roby, J. L., & Sullivan, R. (2001). Adult protection service laws: A comparison of state statutes from definition to case closure. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 12, 17–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/ J084v12n03_02

Rovi, S., Chen, P. H., Vega, M., Johnson, M. S., & Mouton, C. P. (2009). Mapping the elder mistreatment iceberg: U.S. hospitalizations with elder abuse and neglect diagnoses. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 21, 346 –359. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08946560903005109

Schafer, M. H., & Koltai, J. (2015). Does embeddedness protect? Personal network density and vulnerability to mistreatment among older Ameri- can adults. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B: Psychological Sci- ences and Social Sciences, 70, 597– 606. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ geronb/gbu071

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

310 ROBERTO

Scheiderer, E. M. (2012). Elder abuse: Ethical and related considerations for professionals in psychology. Ethics & Behavior, 22, 75– 87. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2012.638828

Sirey, J. A., Berman, J., Salamone, A., DePasquale, A., Halkett, A., Raeifar, E., . . . Raue, P. J. (2015). Feasibility of integrating mental health screening and services into routine elder abuse practice to im- prove client outcomes. Advanced on-line publication. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 27, 254 –269. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08946566 .2015.1008086

Sooryanarayana, R., Choo, W. Y., & Hairi, N. N. (2013). A review on the prevalence and measurement of elder abuse in the community. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 14, 316 –325. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 1524838013495963

Straus, M. A. (1979). Measuring intrafamily conflict and violence: The conflict tactics (CT) scales. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 75– 88. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/351733

Teaster, P. B., Nerenberg, L., & Stansbury, K. L. (2003). A national look at elder abuse multidisciplinary teams. Journal of Elder Abuse & Ne- glect, 15, 91–107. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J084v15n03_06

Teaster, P. B., & Roberto, K. A. (2004). Sexual abuse of older adults: APS cases and outcomes. The Gerontologist, 44, 788 –796. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1093/geront/44.6.788

Teaster, P. B., Roberto, K. A., & Dugar, T. A. (2006). Intimate partner violence of rural aging women. Family Relations: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Family Studies, 55, 636 – 648. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1111/j.1741-3729.2006.00432.x

USC Department of Family Medicine and Geriatrics and the National Center on Elder Abuse. (n.d.). Training resources on elder abuse. Retrieved from http://trea.usc.edu/about-us/

U.S. Government Printing Office. (2010). Public law 111–148-MAR. 23, 2010. Retrieved from http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-111publ148/pdf/ PLAW-111publ148.pdf

Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence. (2009). Elder abuse, neglect, and family violence: A guide for health care professionals. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence and Wisconsin Bureau of Aging and Disability Resources.

World Health Organization. (2002). Active ageing: A policy framework. Retrieved from http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2002/who_nmh_nph_02.8 .pdf

World Health Organization. (2011). Elder maltreatment. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs357/en/index.html

Zeranski, L., & Halgin, R. P. (2011). Ethical issues in elder abuse report- ing: A professional psychologist’s guide. Professional Psychology: Re- search and Practice, 42, 294 –300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0023625

Ziminski Pickering, C. E., & Rempusheski, V. F. (2014). Examining barriers to self-reporting of elder physical abuse in community-dwelling older adults. Geriatric Nursing, 35, 120 –125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.gerinurse.2013.11.002

Received July 20, 2015 Revision received December 16, 2015

Accepted December 18, 2015 �

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

311COMPLEXITIES OF ELDER ABUSE