Addressing elder abuse in rural and remote communities: social policy, prevention and responses

ABSTRACT

This article reports the findings of an international scoping literature review focussed on social policy, prevention, and service responses to elder abuse in rural and remote communities. Forty-seven articles were included in the review, and fourteen types of prevention or service responses were identified in the literature, including several Indigenous-specific initiatives. The review highlighted the need for meaningful inclusion of rural and remote communities in elder abuse policy, as well as the importance of community consultation and consideration of the local context in developing prevention and response initiatives for these communities.

KEYWORDS:

• Elder abuse
• responses
• review
• rural
• remote
• prevention
• policy

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge the contributions of the project’s working group: Lewis Kaplan (former CEO, OPAN), Craig Gear (current CEO, OPAN), Geoff Rowe (CEO, Aged and Disability Advocacy Australia), Dr Kate Barnett OAM (Stand Out Report), and Dr Chez Leggatt-Cook (Research & Evaluation Services).

Disclosure statement

The research has been published in report form: Warren, A. & Blundell, B. (2018a). Elder abuse in rural & remote communities: Social policy, prevention and responses. Perth, W.A.: Curtin University, with other parts submitted/accepted for publication elsewhere:

●Warren, A. & Blundell, B. (2018b). Bridging the gap between responses to elder abuse and responses to family and domestic violence in rural and remote communities. FRSA 2018 National Conference e-Journal, 3, 76-85 – focussing on the overlap between responses to elder abuse and domestic violence in rural and remote communities

●Blundell, B. & Warren, A. (2019). Reviewing the extent of rural and remote considerations in elder abuse policy: A scoping review. Australian Journal of Rural Health, 27(4), 351-357. doi:10.1111/ajr.12549 – focussing on a review of Australian elder abuse policies

Conflict of interest

The authors have no competing interests in the conduct of this systematic review or the preparation of this manuscript.

Notes

1. The term ‘Indigenous’ has been used rather than ‘Aboriginal’, as some of the literature was from non-Australian contexts and this term is more broadly applicable internationally.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by funding from the Older Persons Advocacy Network (OPAN) (no grant number).