Good afternoon, members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.
Thank you for inviting me to take part in your work on a topic that has been very important to me for nearly 35 years. I share your concerns and your wish to take a more effective approach to addressing the social and public health issue of mistreatment of older adults. I will try to focus my remarks on the federal government's areas of jurisdiction, while vigorously advocating stronger federal-provincial and territorial dialogue, particularly regarding intervention practices within the jurisdiction of the provinces and territories.
My presentation will address four brief points.
First, I'd like to discuss current knowledge of abuse.
We have extensive data on which to base a profile of elder abuse. For your information, I have submitted to you one of our papers, which was recently published in English and French.
Nearly 16% of seniors around the world are abused every year. According to the most recent of the three national prevalence studies, the figure here at home is slightly more than 8%. We should not conclude that the situation is much better here because the scope of the abuse is Canada is underestimated as a result of methodological issues. I do not have enough data to establish a percentage of the seniors who are abused in long-term care centres. That's a concern considering that residents with cognitive and physical deficits aren't always able to defend themselves.
A number of papers have focused on the determinants of abuse. Contrary to popular belief, abuse can be explained more in terms of risk factors, such as environment and characteristics of the abuser, than of vulnerability factors specific to the abused senior, even where we know that cognitive deficits and low incomes are major vulnerability factors.
Every type of abuse has physical, psychological, material, financial and social consequences. In a research project that we recently completed on the abuse of seniors with disabilities, we more clearly identified the short- and long-term scope of those consequences. The abuse of these persons is all the more concerning in cases where they are receiving the services they absolutely need in order to function. In these instances, I share your concern to come down hard on individuals who neglect seniors in their care.
Lastly, it is particularly important to continue developing public awareness, train current and future practitioners, promote early detection and provide solutions suited to seniors' needs.
Second, I'd like to describe the legal scope of the concept of abuse.
The committee is particularly examining the suitability of current statutes in combating senior abuse. We should not lose sight of the fact that many instances of abuse may not be treated as such because they are not provided for in the Criminal Code. Consider, for example, the deliberate ignoring of seniors, inappropriate clauses in leases, the burden of proof that must be met to prove criminal harassment, and so on. Section 718.2 of Canada's Criminal Code, which concerns sentencing principles, is the only provision under which victimization, age and consequences can be clearly linked. Is that enough?
Few situations are reported to the police, who are the gateway to the criminal justice system. Although seniors do not always want these situations to be handled under criminal law, particularly when the abuser is a family member, how are police officers prepared to address them?
During the period of questions, I can tell you, for example, about the practices the Montreal police department has introduced with a grant from the new horizons for seniors program, practices that the World Health Organization considers promising. We should also discuss the importance of teletestimony for seniors and the harmful effects of the delays inherent in our justice system.
Third, I'd like to discuss access to justice.
Access to justice includes a major social dimension that presupposes a certain degree of freedom, whereas many abused seniors are under the control of the person or organization that abuses them, which compromises their ability to decide and take action. Some family members who want to protect them may, on the contrary, be restricting them. Professionals and organizations engage in abuse. Many studies show that social workers take a paternalistic attitude toward seniors and decide for them not to engage with the justice system or else deem them incapable of doing so. How can seniors then take action to gain access to justice?
It is important to consider free or low-cost structures that can guide and assist seniors in their search for justice. Without those structures, access to justice merely reinforces the inequalities associated with age, socioeconomic status and gender; in other words, the inequalities between men and women. I am also convinced that Canada can take further action and do a better job of establishing restorative justice.
I now come to my fourth and final point, which is Canada's role in promoting seniors' rights.
Since 2016, I have been involved in the work of the UN's open-ended working group on ageing for the purpose of strengthening the protection of the human rights of older persons. I contribute to the group not as a university professor, but as a person engaged with an NGO, the International Network for the Prevention of Elder Abuse.
Canada is often viewed as a beacon around the world. However, I question the hesitant stance that Canada has taken recently, and indeed at various times…
Have I exceeded my time, Madam Chair?