Elder abuse research rarely differentiates by the type of elder maltreatment involved when identifying risk factors. The purpose of this study was to compare risk factors across four predominant types of elder maltreatment (financial exploitation, physical abuse, neglect by others, and hybrid financial exploitation [HFE]). Data were collected from two sources: interviews with victims of substantiated elder abuse, responding adult protective services (APS) caseworkers (N = 71), and third-party informants; and a statewide database that contained all substantiated cases over a corresponding 2-year period (N = 2,142). Using chi-square (interview data) and logistic regressions (Adult Services/Adult Protective Services [ASAPS] data), significant differences across the four types of elder maltreatment were found. These two datasets provide converging evidence for the importance of differentiating by type of maltreatment when identifying risk factors for elder maltreatment and for the importance of considering both the elderly victim and the abusive individual when predicting type of elder maltreatment.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Objective: This is the first research study to compare pure financial exploitation (PFE) of an elderly person—financial exploitation that occurs independently of another form of elder abuse—with hybrid financial exploitation (HFE)—financial exploitation that co-occurs with physical abuse and/or neglect. Method: Thirty-eight cases of PFE and 16 cases of HFE were studied. Triangulated interviews were conducted with up to three respondents per case, with 54 adult protective services (APS) caseworkers, 42 of their clients with substantiated elder maltreatment, and 31 third party uninvolved persons interviewed. Results: In comparison to PFE, when HFE occurred the victims were less healthy and more often abused by a cohabiting person perceived by elderly victims as their caretaker, but also feared by the elderly person. The duration of HFE, often by an unemployed and financially dependent adult offspring, was lengthier and frequently long-standing. The actions of APS in HFE cases were indicative of the seriousness of these cases. Furthermore, the victims of this abuse were more likely to experience adverse outcomes. Conclusions: PFE and HFE differed across a range of variables and necessitate different interventions. Victims of HFE require extensive assistance to address both their own needs and those of the abusive individual, while victims of PFE require education about maintaining their financial security and independence.