NCJ Number
207737
Journal
Journal of Family Violence Volume: 19 Issue: 5 Dated: October 2004 Pages: 269-277
Editor(s)
Vincent B. Van Hasselt,
Michel Hersen
Date Published
October 2004
Length
9 pages
Annotation
This study attempted to establish preliminary estimates and related risk factors for elder abuse among Hong Kong Chinese families.
Abstract
Social changes in Hong Kong brought about by urbanization and western influences have gradually eroded the traditional Chinese family relationship. These changing views, combined with a rapidly aging population, make the issue of elder abuse in modern Chinese societies an important topic for research. This study attempted to establish preliminary estimates and related risk factors for elder abuse among Hong Kong Chinese families. The study focused on verbal abuse, physical abuse, and violation of rights of elder persons; risk factors looked at included elder people’s age, gender, living arrangement, visual and memory abilities, presence of chronic illness, and dependence on their caregivers. Participants in the study were 276 Chinese (90 males, 186 females), age 60 to 91, who resided in Hong Kong. About 91 percent of the participants currently lived with their family members. The Revised Conflict Tactic Scale (CTS2) was used to assess the extent and nature of the abuse during the previous 12 months. Analysis of the data revealed that 27.5 percent of the sample reported having experienced at least one abusive behavior committed against them by their caregivers during the year surveyed. Participants reported the most common form of abuse was verbal abuse (26.8 percent), whereas physical abuse (2.5 percent) and violation of personal rights (5.1 percent) were relatively less common. In addition, no indication of gender difference was found among elder abuse. The findings show that overall abuse and verbal abuse were best predicted by participants’ poor visual and memory abilities, dependence on the caregivers, and caregivers’ non-dependence on them. Participants’ age was the only significant predictor for violation of personal rights. Study limitations and implications for future research are discussed. References and 3 tables