Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Editorial

Editorial This final edition in 2006 has a distinct international flavour with three research papers, all attempting to document the scale of abuse found among older people. Pavel Puchkov reports on a descriptive study of elder abuse in the Russian Federation. This study in four social service population centres revealed the following: Most respondents were physically, psychologically, and financially independent, despite the fact that most of them suffered at least one form of chronic illness. Psychological abuse was the most prevalent form of maltreatment. The profile of the abused in the samples was female, aged 70 or over, and not dependent on the abuser. Only a small number of abuse victims were dependent on the abuser for companionship and help with daily activities. The person responsible for the abuse was usually known to the abused – frequently children, relatives or neighbours. The highest number of respondents thought that alcoholism accounted for the cause of abuse. The study from Turkey conducted by Nesrin A ti reports on the bio-psycho-social care problems of patients with dementia, and also stress and burnout of their caregivers. ˘ They also quote Keskinog lu et al (2004) who report similar levels of abuse to previous prevalence studies (see Bennett, Kingston and Penhale, 1997), namely – physical abuse 1.5%, financial abuse 2.5%, psychological abuse/neglect 3.5%. Maja Racic and colleagues from Bosnia and Herzegovina utilised the Hwalek- Sengstock Elder Abuse Screening Test (EAST) on a sample of 184 older people with a range of mental disorders. Mistreatment was identified in 71% of the patients. These three studies show remarkable variation in the scale of elder abuse in the three different countries. There are obvious reasons. Different samples, (variation with age, disability and diagnosis), but perhaps the most important issue is the measurement tool utilised. Sequeira and colleagues’ paper points to a real omission in knowledge surrounding the impact of sexual abuse on people with learning disabilities behaviour. Three key areas for development are considered: first the implications for abuse evaluations/ assessments, second how to identify individuals at increased risk of disturbance, third, the implications for treatment and provision of psychotherapeutic services. The Scottish Executive has recently published their new proposed legislation to protect vulnerable adults known as the adult support and protection (Scotland) bill. Our legal editor, Alison Brammer provides an overview of the bill. In this edition we are also featuring a forum of viewpoints on the subject of direct payments by Phil Madden, Leo Quigley, Paul Swift and Gary Fitzgerald. The Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) has recently published Better Safe Than Sorry. This document is designed to assist people and organisations to safeguard adults living in care homes from abuse. Available from: http://www.csci.org.uk/ PDF/better_safe_than_sorry_[tagged][2].pdf Paul Kingston The Journal of Adult Protection Volume 8 Issue 4 • December 2006 © Pavilion Publishing (Journals) Limited http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png The Journal of Adult Protection Pier Professional

Editorial

Kingston, Paul
The Journal of Adult Protection , Volume 8 (4) – Dec 1, 2006
Download PDF
1 page

Loading next page...
 
/lp/pier-professional/editorial-qWSdskLFWu
Publisher
Pier Professional
Copyright
Copyright © 2006 by Pier Professional Limited
ISSN
1466-8203
eISSN
2042-8669
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This final edition in 2006 has a distinct international flavour with three research papers, all attempting to document the scale of abuse found among older people. Pavel Puchkov reports on a descriptive study of elder abuse in the Russian Federation. This study in four social service population centres revealed the following: Most respondents were physically, psychologically, and financially independent, despite the fact that most of them suffered at least one form of chronic illness. Psychological abuse was the most prevalent form of maltreatment. The profile of the abused in the samples was female, aged 70 or over, and not dependent on the abuser. Only a small number of abuse victims were dependent on the abuser for companionship and help with daily activities. The person responsible for the abuse was usually known to the abused – frequently children, relatives or neighbours. The highest number of respondents thought that alcoholism accounted for the cause of abuse. The study from Turkey conducted by Nesrin A ti reports on the bio-psycho-social care problems of patients with dementia, and also stress and burnout of their caregivers. ˘ They also quote Keskinog lu et al (2004) who report similar levels of abuse to previous prevalence studies (see Bennett, Kingston and Penhale, 1997), namely – physical abuse 1.5%, financial abuse 2.5%, psychological abuse/neglect 3.5%. Maja Racic and colleagues from Bosnia and Herzegovina utilised the Hwalek- Sengstock Elder Abuse Screening Test (EAST) on a sample of 184 older people with a range of mental disorders. Mistreatment was identified in 71% of the patients. These three studies show remarkable variation in the scale of elder abuse in the three different countries. There are obvious reasons. Different samples, (variation with age, disability and diagnosis), but perhaps the most important issue is the measurement tool utilised. Sequeira and colleagues’ paper points to a real omission in knowledge surrounding the impact of sexual abuse on people with learning disabilities behaviour. Three key areas for development are considered: first the implications for abuse evaluations/ assessments, second how to identify individuals at increased risk of disturbance, third, the implications for treatment and provision of psychotherapeutic services. The Scottish Executive has recently published their new proposed legislation to protect vulnerable adults known as the adult support and protection (Scotland) bill. Our legal editor, Alison Brammer provides an overview of the bill. In this edition we are also featuring a forum of viewpoints on the subject of direct payments by Phil Madden, Leo Quigley, Paul Swift and Gary Fitzgerald. The Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) has recently published Better Safe Than Sorry. This document is designed to assist people and organisations to safeguard adults living in care homes from abuse. Available from: http://www.csci.org.uk/ PDF/better_safe_than_sorry_[tagged][2].pdf Paul Kingston The Journal of Adult Protection Volume 8 Issue 4 • December 2006 © Pavilion Publishing (Journals) Limited

Journal

The Journal of Adult Protection – Pier Professional

Published: Dec 1, 2006

There are no references for this article.