Executive summary

Seniors safety, including the elimination of neglect, abuse and violence against older persons (hereafter referred to as “senior abuse”), is a national and international priority.Footnote 1 In order to develop evidence-based solutions, data on the nature and extend of senior abuse are required. As law enforcement agencies are engaged to respond to some incidents of senior abuse, partnerships with police services can help shed light on what date are collected and how they are used. Justice Canada collaborated with the Edmonton Police Service’s (EPS) Senior Protection Unit to examine data collection practices and responses to senior abuse in Edmonton, Alberta.

Alberta has adopted a coordinated community response (CCR) model to help address senior abuse. Under a CCR model, community organizations and service providers collaborate to offer people-centred services for seniors and families of seniors affected by abuse. The goal is to connect clients with the appropriate supports and interventions with respect to housing, finances, legal aid, court support, health services, counselling, and dispute resolution. In Edmonton, the CCR model includes triaging senior abuse cases according to risk level, with the Elder Abuse Resources and Supports Program (EARS) managing low- to medium-risk cases, and the Seniors Protection Partnership (SPP) managing high-risk cases. The EPS’s Senior Protection Unit has dedicated detectives who handle complex and serious senior abuse cases and work in partnership with the SPP, the team managing high-risk cases, while also referring lower-risk cases to EARS, when appropriate.

This case study examined 691 senior abuse incidents or suspicions (hereafter referred to as “reports”) from 2015 to 2021, identified using two data sources: the SPP database and the Edmonton Police Reporting and Occurrence System (EPROS), a record management system used by the EPS. This represents all senior abuse reports that came to the attention of the Senior Protection Unit during this period. The study also included two group interviews with 10 key informants, including detectives from the Senior Protection Unit, representatives from the City of Edmonton, and community service providers who are members of Edmonton’s Elder Abuse Consultation Team via the SPP.

Although senior abuse is a significant public health and justice issue, it remains under-reported. Findings highlighted numerous methods for seeking help or reporting senior abuse in Edmonton other than calling the police. According to interviewees, reports of abuse primarily come to the attention of police through the public hotline (the “Elder Abuse Intake line”) from people other than the victim, such as a family member; a healthcare or social service provider (e.g., a doctor, nurse, physiotherapist, social worker); or others (e.g., a bank teller, neighbour). Several barriers prevent victims, witnesses or others from reporting senior abuse, the most common being the victim’s desire to protect their abuser—who may be a family member such as a child or grandchild, an intimate partner or even a friend—from any legal consequences.

According to interviewees, senior victims were often women, had low income and had some level of diminished cognitive capacity. Interviewees also shared that victims were most often White, Indigenous or Asian, a finding consistent with the population distribution in Edmonton. Abusers were predominately men, often the victim’s adult child or grandchild who may be struggling with a variety of personal challenges, such as mental health and addiction issues.

Data showed that over two-thirds (67%) of reports involved at least some type of physical abuse, over one-quarter (28%) involved some type of financial abuse, and over one-tenth (15%) involved some type of psychological or emotional abuse.Footnote 2 Interviewees noted there is often more than one type of abuse in a case, and other types and forms, such as neglect, exist despite not being reflected in the data. Other types may be unrecognized by the victim as abuse, be subtle, or be difficult to prove. Though data were too limited to analyze statistically, interviewees noted that while some reports are closed relatively quickly (i.e., under three months), some may take much longer, even years, due to the complexities of the investigation.

Over four-fifths (80%) of senior abuse reports were addressed or resolved through means outside of the justice system, such as through the supports and services provided via the SPP. One-fifth (20%) of reports resulted in charges being laid, of which half (50%) resulted in a stay of proceedings or the charges being withdrawn, and less than half (42%) resulted in a finding of guilt. Most (80%) guilty verdicts led to a custodial sentence as the most serious sentence in the case, often for short terms (i.e., less than one year). The rest led to a probation order (17%) or fine (3%).

Findings highlighted that senior abuse may be reported and recorded under various disciplines or systems. As well, responses to senior abuse are multifaceted and the criminal justice system is only one option. Numerous challenges exist, particularly with respect to financial abuse, including power of attorneys, personal directives and other financial abuse-related claims. Interviewees also identified helpful responses to senior abuse, such as applying a multidisciplinary and people-centred approach, having dedicated senior abuse professionals and training, and providing peer-support groups for seniors.