Attitudes about Sanctioning Elder Abuse Offenders among Police Chiefs, Nursing Home Employees, and Students

• Author: Bruce L. Berg,Brain K. Payne,La Donna Flanagan James
• DOI: 10.1177/0306624X01453008
• Published date: 01 June 2001
• Date: 01 June 2001
• Subject Matter: Journal Article

International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology

Attitudes and Elder Abuse

Attitudes About Sanctioning Elder Abuse

Offenders Among Police Chiefs, Nursing

Home Employees, and Students

Brain K. Payne

Bruce L. Berg

La Donna Flanagan James

Abstract: Since the early 1970s, demographers and other social scientists have predictedan

increasein the number of elderly people living in America. What has not increased to the same

magnitude, however,is our understanding of the criminal victimization of elderly persons or

our understanding how to respond to offenderswho abuse elderly persons. Of concern in this

researchwas the way that four groups perceive the sanctioning of offenses committed against

elderly persons: police chiefs, nursing home administrators,nursing home staff, and students

enrolled in sociology and criminal justice courses. By conceptualizing the perceptions of

abuse among these four groups,steps can be taken toward either preventing or responding to

crimes against elderly persons.

In the mid-1970s the concept of “granny-bashing” beganto appear in British med-

ical journals and described instances where older citizens were abused by family

members, caregivers, health care employees, and a host of other individuals

(Baker, 1975; Ogg & Munn-Giddings, 1993). At the same time, predictions were

made that the number of elderly citizens living in the United States wouldincrease

gradually throughout the 1980s and 1990s. Since then, two things have occurred.

First, we have seen increases in longevity and the number of people ages 65 or

older. Second, we have witnessed the evolution of the granny-bashing concept

into other concepts viewed as more politically correct. These new concepts

included battered parent, elder maltreatment, and elder abuse (Crystal, 1987;

Katz, 1979; Pillemer, 1986). Although these new concepts have been forthcom-

ing, research into the way elder abuse cases are handled in the legalsystem is rela-

tively scarce in the literature.

Understanding how various individuals perceivethe role of the criminal justice

system in preventing cases of elder abuse or punishing the offender is especially

important, given the way that the acts havebeen treated as social problems rather

than justice problems in the past (Curry, Johnson, & Sigler, 1994). Part of this

noncriminalization of cases of elder abuse likely stem from the desire of certain

groups to keep cases out of the justice system. However,because this assertion is

NOTE:The authors would like to thank anonymous reviewers for their input in developingthis article.

International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 45(3), 2001 363-382

2001 Sage Publications

363

largely untested, what is needed is an examination of how groups who are

involved in dealing with elder abuse cases perceive the importance of using the

criminal justice system to punish the transgressor. In this article we examine four

such groups, specifically (a) nursing home administrators who are often in the ini-

tial position to officially respond to abuse, (b) nursing home staffwho may either

be witnesses or perpetrators of abuse, (c) police chiefs who at least indirectly

decide which cases should be of primary concern in a community,and (d) criminal

justice and sociology students, many of whom eventually will become partici-

pants in the justice system and potential guardians against the abuse of elders.

The current research addresses how members of these groups in the common-

wealth of Virginia perceivethe need to impose legal sanctions against those who

commit acts that may be legally defined as elder abuse. Of central concern are the

similarities and differences in the groups’ beliefs about the appropriate punish-

ment for elder abusers. By understanding how these groups perceive elder abuse

and the sanctions that should be imposed, we may gain a greater appreciation for

how to draw together general social perceptions of elder abuse and viable sanc-

tions. In turn, groups, such as those examined in this research, may be able to

better work together toward resolving the overall problem of elder abuse.

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Official estimates cited in the elder abuse literature indicate that anywhere

from 1 to 2 million adults ages 65 or older are abused annually (Baron & Welty,

1996; Wolf,1996). Elderly victims often will not report abuse because of a fear of

retaliation, shame, or beliefs that the system will do more harm than good. Some

fear they will be placed in a nursing home if they report abuse, whereas others see

reporting as being nugatory, leading to a cumbersome process placing on their

livestime and economic constraints that they would rather avoid (Payne, 2000). In

fact, some sources argue that only 1 in 14 cases of elder abuse is reported (Bruce,

1994). Other sources suggest that 1 in 10 older citizens are victims of abuse each

year (Heisler, 1991; Wolf, 1996). Clearly, the elder abuse literature agrees that

officialstatistics may be grossly underestimating the actual number of elder abuse

cases. Since the development of an area of study focusing on what is nowreferred

to as elder abuse, controversies have centered on the following two questions:

What is elder abuse? and What kind of problem is it? Briefly addressing the way

that past criminological and elder abuse research has answered these questions

will illustrate the need to examine how various groups dealing with elder abuse

might address the same questions.

What is elder abuse? Defining elder abuse is likely one of the most difficult

tasks confronting elder abuse researchers (Eleazer, 1995; Macolini, 1995). Elder

abuse researchers cite a number of reasons why varieddefinitions are problematic

(see Hudson & Carlson, 1998; Johnson, 1995; Ogg & Munn-Giddings, 1993).

364 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology