Protecting victims of elder financial exploitation: the role of an Elder Abuse Forensic Center in referring victims for conservatorship

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine the extent to which an Elder Abuse Forensic Center protects financial exploitation (FE) victims through referral to the Office of the Public Guardian (PG) for investigation and possible conservatorship (called ‘guardianship’ in many states).

Method: Los Angeles County Elder Abuse Forensic Center cases involving adults aged 65 and older (April 2007–December 2009) were matched using one-to-one propensity-score matching to 33,650 usual care Adult Protective Services (APS) cases. The final analysis sample consisted of 472 FE cases.

Results: Compared to usual care, Forensic Center cases were more likely to be referred to the PG for investigation (30.6%, n = 72 vs. 5.9%, n = 14, p < .001). The strongest predictors of PG referral were suspected cognitive impairment, as identified by APS (odds ratio [OR] = 11.69, confidence intervals [CI]: 3.50–39.03), and Forensic Center review (OR = 7.85, CI: 3.86–15.95). Among referred cases, the court approved conservatorship at higher rates – though not statistically significant – for Forensic Center cases than usual care (52.9%, n = 36/68 vs. 41.7%, n = 5/12).

Conclusion: Conservatorship may be a necessary last resort to improve safety for some FE victims, and the Forensic Center appears to provide a pathway to this service. These findings suggest modification to the Elder Abuse Forensic Center conceptual model and contribute to an emerging body of evidence on the role of the Forensic Center in addressing elder abuse.

Keywords:

• elder mistreatment
• multidisciplinary team
• elder abuse intervention
• guardianship

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Diana Homeier, MD, Allyson Young, Kelly Fujikawa, the Los Angeles County Adult Protective Services, and the Los Angeles County Office of the Public Guardian for invaluable project support. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Justice.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the UniHealth Foundation [grant number 1066] and Award No. 2009-IJ-CX-0017 awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Justice.