Search results

The purpose of this paper is to identify, describe and compare the studies of the prevalence of abuse and neglect of older adults developed in Portugal.

A retrospective bibliographic search of seven descriptors in English and Portuguese, of academic and professional papers and university institutional repositories was performed.

Of the nine studies selected, seven consisted of grey literature – research developed within the course of academic post‐graduate studies. The studies were conducted on a small scale, more often than not, through a non‐probabilistic convenience sampling method. From the nine studies, two instruments prevailed: the Questions to Elicit Elder Abuse aimed at older adults and the Caregiver Abuse Screen aimed at caregivers. Community‐dwelling older adults self‐reported a higher prevalence of abuse (between 66.7 and 86.7 per cent) than care professionals working with older adults suffering from dementia (between 26.7 and 47.4 per cent). Emotional abuse and neglect were the first and second most prevalent forms of abuse, followed by financial abuse, whereas physical abuse was the least prevalent type of abuse encountered. A poorer perception of health, not making/receiving visits and residing in an urban area were the more consistent variables associated with abuse of older adults.

Overall, this paper provides a first consideration to the prevalence rates of older adult abuse and neglect from research studies in Portugal. The revised design studies and screening methods employed can help researchers improve future study design and move from the description to a more theoretically oriented research. Furthermore, it can help practitioners learn screening methods and discover the findings associated with abuse.

Elder abuse is an issue of great concern world‐wide, not least in Europe. Older people are increasingly vulnerable to physical, psychological, financial maltreatment and sexual coercion. However, due to complexities of measurement, psychological abuse may be underestimated. The purpose of this study is to investigate the prevalence of psychological abuse toward older persons within a 12 month period.

The study design was cross‐sectional and data were collected during January‐July 2009 in the survey “Elder abuse: a multinational prevalence survey, ABUEL”. The participants were 4,467 randomly selected persons aged 60‐84 years (2,559 women, 57.3 per cent) from seven EU countries (Germany, Greece, Italy, Lithuania, Portugal, Spain, Sweden). The sample size was adapted to each city according to their population of women and men aged 60‐84 years (albeit representative and proportional to sex‐age). The participants answered a structured questionnaire either through a face‐to‐face interview or a mix of interview/self‐response. The data were analysed using descriptive statistics and regression methods.

The prevalence of overall psychological abuse was 29.7 per cent in Sweden, followed by 27.1 per cent in Germany; 24.6 per cent in Lithuania and 21.9 per cent in Portugal. The lowest prevalence was reported in Greece, Spain and Italy with 13.2 per cent, 11.5 per cent and 10.4 per cent, respectively. Similar tendencies were observed concerning minor/severe abuse. The Northern countries (Germany, Lithuania, Sweden) compared to Southern countries (Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain) reported a higher mean prevalence (across countries) of minor/severe abuse (26.3 per cent/11.5 per cent and 12.9 per cent/5.9 per cent, respectively). Most perpetrators (71.2 per cent) were spouses/partners and other relatives (e.g. children). The regression analysis indicated that being from Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain was associated with less risk of psychological abuse. Low social support, living in rented housing, alcohol use, frequent health care use, and high scores in anxiety and somatic complaints were associated with increased risk of psychological abuse.

Psychological abuse was more prevalent in Northern than Southern countries and factors such as low social support and high anxiety levels played an important role. Further studies are warranted to investigate the prevalence of psychological abuse and risk factors among older persons in other EU countries. Particular attention should be paid to severe abuse. Such research may help policy makers and health planers/providers in tailoring interventions to tackle the ever growing problem of elder abuse.

The paper reports data from the ABUEL Survey, which collected population based data on elderly abuse.

The article outlines the background to the recently commissioned UK national study of the prevalence of elder abuse and explains the methodology adopted in Stages 1 and 2 of the research. This is being funded by Comic Relief with co‐funding from the Department of Health and carried out by a team of researchers at King's College London and the National Centre for Social Research. Stage 1, the development work, was completed in autumn 2005. Stage 2, which began in March 2006, is a national survey of the private residential population of the United Kingdom.

The purpose of this paper is to report on the findings from a study commissioned by the Office of the Children’s Commissioner (OCC) in England, concerning intrafamilial child sexual abuse (IFCSA)/incest. Specifically, it aims to explore what is known about the prevalence, nature, and impact of IFCSA and where the gaps in knowledge lie.

A rapid evidence assessment (REA) was used, the function of which is to: search the literature as comprehensively as possible within given time constraints; collate descriptive outlines of the available evidence on a topic and critically appraise it; sift out studies of poor quality; and provide an overview of the evidence. Over 57,000 documents were scanned, and 296 ultimately systematically analysed.

It was found that: there is wide variation in prevalence rates between studies; girls are more likely to be victims than boys; the onset of abuse is typically school age; abuse in minority groups is under-reported; sibling abuse may be more common than that by fathers; female perpetrated abuse may be under-reported; families where abuse occurs are often dysfunctional; and IFCSA has significant adverse effects on victims.

A REA is not a full systematic review, differing in the scope and depth of the searches and depending almost exclusively on electronic databases, not accompanied by searching journals by hand.

This work found numerous gaps in current knowledge about IFCSA, which the authors recommend be addressed by further research, including: the scale and nature of IFCSA in disabled victims, research on BME children’s experiences; the prevalence of abuse by stepfathers as compared to biological fathers; the experiences of male victims; the experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered child victims; the short-term impact of IFCSA based on child victims’ experiences; and more widely, further research on the prevalence of abuse in clinical populations and the relationship between that and prevalence in wider society. In addition to such questions, the OCC inquiry will also investigate issues surrounding child protection and criminal justice responses to (IF)CSA and how these might be improved. The evidence base for this section of the inquiry is reported in Gekoski et al. (2016).

The findings of this research provide the evidence base for a new two-year inquiry into the subject of IFCSA by the OCC.

Psychological elder abuse (PEA) assessment is described with different thresholds. The purpose of this paper is to examine how the prevalence of PEA and the phenomenon’s characterisation varied using two different thresholds.

Participants from the cross-sectional population-based study, Aging and Violence (n=1,123), answered three questions regarding PEA. The less strict measure considered PEA as a positive response to any of the three evaluated behaviours. The stricter measure comprised the occurrence, for more than ten times, of one or more behaviours. A multinomial regression compared cases from the two measures with non-victims.

Results show different prevalence rates and identified perpetrators. The two most prevalent behaviours (ignoring/refusing to speak and verbal aggression) occurred more frequently (>10 times). Prevalence nearly tripled for “threatening” from the stricter measure (>10 times) to the less strict (one to ten times). More similarities, rather than differences, were found between cases of the two measures. The cohabiting variable differentiated the PEA cases from the two measures; victims reporting abuse >10 times were more likely to be living with a spouse or with a spouse and children.

Development of a valid and reliable measure for PEA that includes different ranges is needed.

The study exemplifies how operational definitions can impact empirical evidence and the need for researchers to analyse the effect of the definitional criteria on their outcomes, since dichotomization between victim and non-victim affects the phenomenon characterisation.

Self‐reported health (and the extent to which this was associated with partner abuse or psychosocial variables) was investigated in 132 women recruited from a domestic violence service. The survey instrument included abuse disability, life event and daily stress exposure, social support, anger expression style, and perceived health status. The prevalence estimates for this sample were significantly higher than standard estimates across a range of health problems. Regression models demonstrated that whilst the extent of partner abuse predicted the prevalence of three conditions, psychosocial factors were more substantial predictors of health and well‐being in domestic violence victims. Of these, life event frequency and anger expression were the most significant. These findings provide important information about the health of domestic violence victims as they seek support from domestic violence agencies, with relevance for practitioners working with victims who have terminated a violent relationship and for those supporting victims who remain with a violent partner.

The findings of the UK prevalence study of abuse and neglect among older people provide unique opportunities for adult protection systems to consider possible changes to their priorities, activities, services and publicity. This article reports first on the contribution of adult protection coordinators to the design and execution of the research. It then sets out potential uses for the evidence provided by the study by the adult protection community in the UK. The article outlines some of the media reactions to the study that adult protection workers will also have to understand and navigate. It concludes with some suggestions for future research and service development in the UK context.

People with a learning disability remain at increased risk of abuse and neglect due to a number of factors associated with learning disability per se and the culture in which they live. Understanding the prevalence of abuse within this population allows for appropriate planning and service development. Understanding more about the type and frequency of abuse (and the perpetrators) facilitates prevention of abuse. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

All clients allocated to a psychologist between 2009 and 2011 were included in this survey. The psychologist reported whether the client had experienced any abuse over their lifetime. Information regarding the type of abuse experienced, the relationship to the abuser, and the number of different episodes of abuse was recorded.

Of the 695 clients in the survey 25 per cent had experienced abuse. Of this 25 per cent, 46 per cent were men and 54 per cent were women. In all, 23 per cent of the group who had experienced abuse were referred to the service as a direct result of abuse, whilst 77 per cent were referred for another reason. The most prevalent types of abuse were emotional (27 per cent), sexual (24 per cent), physical (20 per cent), and neglect (12 per cent).

Prevalence rates within this study are broadly in line with the existing literature. However, differences included high levels of emotional abuse, and high frequency of abuse perpetrated by women, and by family members. Psychology services should routinely screen for abuse experiences and be alert to the possibility of abuse from female caregivers.

This article aims to explore the perpetrators of abuse among older women living in the community. The study examines whether differences between the perpetrators of different forms of abuse, and for different groups of older women (e.g. by income or age groups) can be detected. Finally, it aims to investigate whether older women talk about the abuse to family or friends, or report it to an official or formal agency, in relation to different perpetrators.

This article provides results from the prevalence study of Abuse and Violence against Older Women in Europe (AVOW‐study). The study involved scientific partners from five EU countries: Finland, Austria, Belgium, Lithuania, and Portugal. In these five countries, the same study was conducted during 2010. In total, 2,880 older women living in the community were interviewed during the course of the study.

The results indicate that 28.1per cent of older women across all countries have experienced some kind of violence and abuse, in the last 12 months, by someone who is close to them. The results offer specific figures for the prevalence of different types of abuse, i.e. physical, psychological, sexual, and financial abuse; violation of personal rights; and neglect. Furthermore, additional insights about the main perpetrators of abuse for different groups of older women are offered.

The article does not address the differences between the five countries. Further research could examine the between‐country variations and identify possible country‐specific explanations.

The implications of these findings for the development of policy and practice are highlighted. Applying only a crime‐focused approach on this topic is not sufficient. Health and social welfare sectors play a key role in ensuring dignity in, and quality of, formal and informal care and need to be supported to do so.

The paper presents the findings of an extensive multi‐national survey on abuse of older women in five European countries.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate chronicity (frequency) in different abuse types (e.g. psychological) and overall abuse (all abuse types) by severity (minor, severe, total) in seven European cities, and scrutinize factors associated with high chronicity levels (frequency on the median and higher) in psychological and overall abuse by severity.

The study design was cross-sectional. The sample consisted of 4,467 randomly selected women/men (2,559 women) aged 60-84 years from seven European cities, and data were analysed with bivariate and multivariate methods.

Chronicity varied across country and by abuse type. For instance, Germany had the highest chronicity means in physical and sexual abuse; Greece in physical, injury, sexual and overall abuse; Lithuania in physical, injury, financial and overall abuse; Portugal in physical abuse; Spain in physical, sexual and financial abuse; and Sweden in psychological, injury, financial and overall abuse. In general, Italy had the lowest chronicity means. The main perpetrators were people close to the respondents and women (in some cases).

The independent relationship (regressions) between chronicity/severity of abuse, country and other variables (e.g. depression) was examined only for psychological and overall abuse. More research into this issue with other types of abuse (e.g. sexual) is warranted.

The paper reports data from the ABUEL survey, which gathered population-based data on elderly abuse.