Elder Abuse: An Anti-oppressive Perspective
Abuse of elderly is a social problem resulting from socially and
structurally constructed negative identity. Studies illustrates that, one among
five elderly adults experienced some kind of abuse in the forms of insulting,
threats, violence or holding important information’s from them (MacKay-Barr
& Csiernik, 2012). Elder abuses and
oppression are viewed as different levels of abuse spectrum from spousal abuse
to a friend or formal paid giver abuse. I argue that elderly abuse is the end
result of socially constructed old age identity, prejudice about ageing process
and various interlocking oppressive factors including behaviors that exclude elderly
adults (Calasanti, 2005; Overall, 2006).
Conceptualization of certain identities are not natural rather a
socially construct one. This kind of
socially created identities are constructed, reinforced and established with
intentionally through normative ideologies, relations and practices. The biological deprivation related to age is
universally considered as ‘old age’ of the person, so that elderly
characteristics as being recognized as partial or incomplete participation of
normative social demands. Which means that the material foundation of the
identity of elderly person is socially acquired in terms of years lived in the
society and how the person is responding to the societal norms. The assumptions
related to aging are a “culturally-imbued” process (Overall, 2006 p.128). I think these assumptions are misleading; in
terms of the stages of life attainments and years lived in the society are
socially constructed and misinterpreted.
A study conducted by MacKay-Barr & Csiernik (2012) explains that
elders with low socio economic status and vulnerable physical and mental
conditions are facing greater amount of risk abuse compared to healthy,
affluent and educated group of their counterpart. WHO defined elder abuse as “a single or
repeated act or lack of appropriate action occurring within any relationship
where there is an expectation of trust which causes harm or distress to an
older person” (as cited in Donovan & Regehr, 2010 p.175). Even though many
of them are aware where to find assistance, a fraction of the cases are
reported and a self disclosure is happening to friends than family members or
public assistance. Elder population, those who are experiencing various kinds
of abuse and neglect encounters significant barriers to disclosure. These obstacles can include “diminished
capacity to comprehend, ignorance of the law, cultural differences and lack of
knowledge about abuse” (Donovan & Regehr, 2010 p.175).
Those who are vulnerable condition in relation to health and other
factors are facing social isolation and a greater amount of abuses. In a study,
the participants responded that they fear about the abusers that if they report
the abuse, there may be increase of abuse, institutionalization or abandonment
(Walsh, Olson, Ploeg, Lohfeld & MacMillan, 2011). MacKay-Barr &
Csiernik (2012) explains that abuse among elderly is perhaps the most
complicated type of violence inside the family and society.
Various elderly abuses can be in the forms of physical, sexual,
psychological, emotional, financial, abandonment, neglect or self neglect
and/or combination of various abusive forms (WHO 2002c as cited in Donovan
& Regehr, 2010). According to Wahl and Purdy (2002), due to various forms
of elderly abuses “depression, fear, anxiety, unexplained physical injury,
dehydration, lack of food, poor hygiene, pressure sores and missing money or
personal items” are common (as cited in Donovan & Regehr, 2010 p.175).
Vulnerability to abuse is a result of oppression experienced as the
greatest consequences of “ableism”, “racism”, “ageism”, “disability”, “heterosexism”,
“sexism”, “classism” and various intersectionality of oppressive factors (Walsh
et al., 2011). The voices of
marginalized elderly population are rarely solicited. Studies shows that the relationship between
maltreatment of elders and various oppressive factors are contributing each
other and that are not properly investigated.
According to Van Wormer (2005) oppression among elderly people described
as “a system of dominance and subordination where elder population divided from
the general population and categorize, dehumanized, discriminated and made
visible in terms of their age and vulnerability” (as cited in Walsh et al.,
2011). Analyzing and addressing various oppressive factors are not only limited
as ageism rather it is associated with various intersecting consequences of
oppression.
Power imbalance creates greater level of oppression among marginalized
elderly people. Power creates high level
of risk abuse. It also can increase the
vulnerability of elder abuse as the society perceived this population as
“weaker, dependent or different”.
Researches related to elder abuse has not profoundly incorporated the
analysis of power imbalance which control and contribute to older adult abuse. Power plays different levels of controlling
factors in elderly life. It can be
within the ongoing relationship who using “a pattern of coercive tactics” to
maintain the control over the relationship or economically exploit. Oppression
is a “salient issue” often resulting from the feeling of “powerlessness, risk
of abuse, victims of help seeking behaviors and influences action taken by
professionals” (Walsh et al., 2011 p. 18-19).
Oppression itself is considered as abusive. There are various forms of oppression
influences elder abuse. Age places a
vital role in various abusive scenarios.
Generally, elder population is stigmatized and excluded from the society
on the basis of age. Harbison (1999)
explains that older adults have admiration of youth and devaluation of their
peer groups (as cited in Walsh et al., 2011).
Maltreatment is a result of aging, rejection of elderly people from the
society and the societal beliefs about older population as a burden. Crichton (1999) noted that ageism took the
power from elder adults and makes them more vulnerable to abuse (as cited in Walsh
et al., 2011).
Ageism is the least reported factor while considering elderly studies. Ageism as structurally oppressed factor
influencing health and social service programs and social security initiatives
compared to the provision of children and youth program (Walsh et al., 2011).
Ageism is generally considered as a systematic stereotyping categorization and
prejudice because they are old age (Calasanti, 2005).
In practice, providing
service for the seniors especially in the case of abuse in the larger community
is a difficult one. A major barrier of
service is that the personal histories are a collective result of individual
and structural oppressions surrounding aging. A protective social work approach
almost the same model of child abuse reporting and response system model of
domestic violence can control elder abuse to a great extent (MacKay-Barr &
Csiernik, 2012). However there are controversies about the individual rights
and self determination of the elderly in this context. The capacity to resist abuse and understand
the situation is again creating controversies while equalizing elderly to children
in need of protection (Donovan & Regehr, 2010).
There are certain limitations
while working with elderly abuse. The
challenging factors can be presented as the misinterpretation of the abusive
situation of the elder person when the abuser is very much cooperative and
supportive. Another challenging factor in the field of elderly abuse includes
various kinds of barriers like language, time and cognitive limitations. It is
very important to understand the cognitive ability, physical health status and
mental health about the client particularly to understand the capacity of the
client to make a decision and report vulnerability or abuse. Abused and
neglected elders are the marginalized population of the society requiring
professional social assistance. Advocacy efforts can protect this
disenfranchised group from the existing continued abuse. Professional
assistance can ensure the abused and neglected elders right to self
determination (Donovan & Regehr, 2010).
Advocacy about abuses on behalf of elderly population in collaboration
with other disciplines and community service organizations is an important role
of social workers. A promotion of
community-wide intervention to prevent the maltreatment of elder people is also
important. Social workers are expected to take the responsibility to get the
clients on various legal matters in terms of human rights, decisional authority
of well being, health and their financial matters (Schwiebert et al., 2000 as
cited in Donovan & Regehr, 2010).
As a social worker I think our research, theory and practice should
focus more on successful ageing. There are various factors associated with
biological ageing. Compared to other forms of oppression ageism defers in terms
of its source of disadvantaged position is an unavoidable part of life (Calasanti,
2005). In addition our culture itself is ageist; as a result the society
oppressed themselves and try to avoid ageing process (Overall, 2006). Old age is a stage of human life, but
materially reconstructed by the individual and the society. Due to the
internalized oppression of ageism, the elder population feels shame about their
life stage.
In this article I was trying to review ageism as a materially
reconstructed identity by the society. Besides, I also tried to make an understanding
about elderly abuse and its connection with various oppressive factors. A
critical social work perspective is that the elderly abuses are potentially
more powerful in conceptualizing the phenomena of risk of abuse.
“If
old age is a social product, not a biological given, then aging is a potential
site not only for oppression but also for liberation. Social and political
reforms in the areas of employment, education, housing, health care, family
structures, social welfare and architecture could redefine the societal context
of aging, eliminate or at least reduce ageism, and support increasing rights,
opportunities, and freedoms for people who have lived many years”
(Overall, 2006 p. 134).
Reference
Calasanti, T. (2005). Ageism, Gravity,
and Gender: Experiences of Aging Bodies. Generations, 29(3), 8-12.
Callan, M. J., Dawtry, R. J., &
Olson, J. M. (2012). Justice Motive effects in Ageism: The effects of a
Victim’s age on Observer Perceptions of Injustice and Punishment Judgments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
48, 1343-1349.
Donovan, K., & Regehr, C. (2010).
Elder Abuse: Clinical, Ethical, and Legal Considerations in Social Work
Practice. Clin Soc Work J, 38, 174-182.
Grenier, A. M., & Guberman, N.
(2009). Creating and Sustaining Disadvantage: The Relevance of a Social
Exclusion Framework. Health and Social
Care in the Community, 17(2), 116-124.
Kaida, L., & Boyd, M. (2011).
Poverty Variations among the Elderly: The Roles of Income Security Policies and
Family Co-Residence. Canadian Journal on
Aging, 30(1), 83-100.
MacKay-Barr, M., & Csiernik, R.
(2012). An Exploration of Elder Abuse in a Rural Canadian Community. Critical Social Work, 13(1), 19-32.
O’Connor, D., Hall, M. I., &
Donnelly, M. (2009). Assessing Capacity within a Context of Abuse or Neglect. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 21,156-169
Overall, C. (2006). Old Age and Ageism,
Impairment and Ableism: Exploring the Conceptual and Material Connections. NWSA Journal, 18(1), 126-137.
Ross, M. M., MacLean, M. J., &
Fisher, R. (2002). End-of-Life Care for Seniors: Public and Professional Awareness. Educational Gerontology, 28(5), 353-366.
doi:10.1080/03601270290081335
Rozanova, J., Northcott, H. C., &
McDaniel, S. A. (2006). Seniors and Portrayals of Intra-generational and
Inter-generational Inequality in the Globe and Mail. Canadian Journal of Aging, 25(4), 373-386.
Sarma, S., Hawley, G., & Basu, K.
(2009). Transitions in living arrangements of Canadian seniors: Findings from
the NPHS longitudinal data. Social Science & Medicine, 68(6), 1106-1113.
doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.12.046
Walsh, C. A., Olson, J. L., Ploeg, J.,
Lohfeld, L., & MacMillan, H. L. (2011). Elder Abuse and Oppression: Voices
of Marginalized Elders. Journal Of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 23(1), 17-42.
doi:10.1080/08946566.2011.534705
