dc.contributor.author | Moir, Emily | |
dc.contributor.author | Blundell, Barbara | |
dc.contributor.author | Clare, Joseph | |
dc.contributor.author | Clare, Michael | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2018-07-18T01:47:55Z | |
dc.date.available | 2018-07-18T01:47:55Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2017 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1034-5329 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10072/378074 | |
dc.description.abstract | The abuse and mistreatment of older people has been brought to the forefront of Australian social policy recently, with the Australia Law Reform Commission (‘ALRC’) releasing the Inquiry on Protecting the Rights of Older Australians from Abuse in June 2017 (ALRC 2017). Further, various state governments have extended their focus on elder abuse through creating and extending interagency policies, undertaking prevalence studies, and developing specific elder abuse prevention services and hotlines (see Kaspiew, Carson & Rhoades 2016). With an ageing population, such government action is promising, as elder abuse is foreseen to become a bigger problem. Numerous state and federal reports have recommended a national prevalence study of elder abuse (ALRC 2017; New South Wales Legislative Council 2016; The Special Taskforce on Domestic and Family Violence in Queensland 2015). One critical issue in measuring elder abuse prevalence is the age used to define ‘older’ (Clare, Blundell & Clare 2011; Kaspiew et al. 2016). This comment argues that studies investigating elder abuse prevalence should move from criterion based on age towards ‘at-risk’ characteristics. The use of existing frameworks from the United Kingdom (‘UK’) could be adopted in Australia to assess the extent of those living in the population with dynamic risk factors who are victims of abuse. Such a framework could meet the recommendation to undertake a national prevalence study and help develop appropriate policy and prevention responses, as well as encompassing a broader group of vulnerable adults rather than just the ‘aged’. | |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Yes | |
dc.language | English | |
dc.language.iso | eng | |
dc.publisher | University of Sydney Law School | |
dc.publisher.uri | http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/journals/CICrimJust/2017/22.html | |
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom | 181 | |
dc.relation.ispartofpageto | 190 | |
dc.relation.ispartofissue | 2 | |
dc.relation.ispartofjournal | Current Issues in Criminal Justice | |
dc.relation.ispartofvolume | 29 | |
dc.subject.fieldofresearch | Criminology | |
dc.subject.fieldofresearch | Criminology not elsewhere classified | |
dc.subject.fieldofresearch | Sociology | |
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode | 4402 | |
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode | 440299 | |
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode | 4410 | |
dc.title | Best Practice for Estimating Elder Abuse Prevalence in Australia: Moving towards the Dynamic Concept of 'Adults at Risk' and away from Arbitrary Age Cut-Offs | |
dc.type | Journal article | |
dc.type.description | C2 - Articles (Other) | |
dc.type.code | C - Journal Articles | |
dc.description.version | Version of Record (VoR) | |
gro.faculty | Arts, Education & Law Group, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice | |
gro.rights.copyright | © 2017, Published by The Institute of Criminology, University of Sydney. The attached file is reproduced here in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the journal's website for access to the definitive, published version. | |
gro.hasfulltext | Full Text | |
gro.griffith.author | Moir, Emily C. | |