A Paradigm Shift: From reactive ‘stop elder abuse’ campaigns to proactive, preventive elder justice
When people ask me if I am retired, I take it as a leading question. In dignified defiance, I reply, “No, I’m advocating for elder justice.” The blank stares and silence that follow provide an opportunity to explain. “I’m fighting against elder abuse,” I add, but at times the stares and silence simply expand.
Pamela B. Teaster and Jeffrey E. Hall (2018, 7) observe:
“Elder abuse, “only occasionally becomes concrete, real, and fully present in the eyes of the public… Even on the rare occasions when this problem breaches the public’s consciousness (e.g., Mickey Rooney, Brooke Astor), its impacts are fleeting and superficial because its significance to and implications for the life of the average person are perceived as low or unrelatable.”
Brooke Astor was a New York City philanthropist who gave generously to the arts and social causes as the president of the Vincent Astor Foundation for four decades. She was also my grandmother. She suffered from elder abuse and financial exploitation by her only child, my father.
At age 96, my grandmother received the nation’s top civilian honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom, from President Bill Clinton in recognition of her achievements. By age 100, she was confined to her apartment, isolated from close friends, deprived of necessities, psychologically manipulated, and robbed.
When I learned of my grandmother’s abuse, I was filled with angst, frustration, and a sense of impotence as I watched her world, which had spanned the globe and a century, become so diminished and compromised. I decided to act, but I had no idea what to do or whether my actions might make matters worse.
Working with many other concerned persons, I helped save my grandmother. In 2006, I petitioned the New York Supreme Court for guardianship, which was awarded. The guardianship allowed my grandmother to spend her last days as she wished: in her country house, with loved ones, and free from fear.
My grandmother wouldn’t have wanted to be one of America’s most famous cases of elder abuse. She didn’t choose to be victimized while in the throes of Alzheimer’s disease (interview with Jason Karlawish, 2017) — to be deprived, manipulated and robbed — as part of my father’s “scheme to defraud in the first degree,” so characterized by the Manhattan District Attorney’s Elder Abuse Unit, led by Liz Loewy. Still, my grandmother’s sad circumstances have informed a timely—and timeless — cause: elder justice. This might be her greatest and most lasting legacy.
Our greatest impediment to elder justice is ageism. By living to the fullest each day, year after year, decade after decade, my grandmother did so much to combat this unfortunate prejudice. It is ironic and so sad that her ageless attitude did not shield her from abuse. The same can be said for millions of older adults suffering similar harm today.
Aftermath and catalyst
Elder abuse is often poorly understood, even in some courts that handle such cases.
In a December 2006 court decision my grandmother’s guardianship judge authorized reimbursement of my fees for bringing the guardianship petition, stating,
“Although this matter voluntarily settled before the hearing, I find the petitioner Philip Marshall was the prevailing party…”
But the judge also decided to award my father a portion of his legal fees, writing,
“I make this ruling based on the conclusion of the court evaluator that the allegations in the petition regarding Mrs. Astor’s medical and dental care, and the other allegations of intentional elder abuse by the Marshalls, were not substantiated.”
The court evaluator’s report opened the door wide to claims that there was no elder abuse. “Astor son is cleared,” headlined The New York Times, which quoted my father’s lawyer saying, “This is a case that was given birth from allegations that were absolutely fictitious regarding Mr. Marshall’s care of his mother.” (December 6, 2006)
Based on this decision, I can only conclude that the court evaluator did not understand the meaning of elder abuse — nor did he connect the dots and decimal points. He never made a connection between the allegations in my guardianship petition and an appendix to his report: a long list of financial dealings, totaling tens of millions of dollars, identified by the temporary guardian of the purse, JPMorgan Chase. These transfers directly affected our out-of-court settlement, which was won in large part because of these financial findings.
Nevertheless, on the dark December day of this decision, my Pyrrhic victory found me losing the greater war against elder abuse. Was my grandmother’s case to be elder justice’s Plessey v. Ferguson, setting back elder justice a half- century? Was I to repurpose my family’s dirty laundry as surrender flags, giving up on the greater cause I had been thrust into? No. This one setback catapulted my campaign from case to a cause bigger than my grandmother and myself.
As my father was declaring he had been vindicated, the Elder Abuse Unit of the Manhattan District Attorney expanded its investigation, empaneled a grand jury, and issued subpoenas. In 2009, after a 17-week-long trial with 72 witnesses, a grand jury convicted my father on 14 of 16 counts.
This was a very bittersweet harvest after a long spring and summer of heart-wrenching testimony. Yet it’s a harvest that has nourished the cause of elder justice. We advanced from a time of tribulation to a time of trial, from the anguish of hearing the allegations in my guardianship petition were “unsubstantiated” to a criminal trial that proved otherwise. All but one count was upheld upon appeal. At 89, my father served two months of his one-to-three-year sentence before being granted medical parole.
Elder abuse is a crime
In filing a guardianship petition for my grandmother, I hoped this “family affair” would be quietly settled. Instead, I learned that elder abuse is not a family affair or a “civil” matter. Elder abuse is a crime, and it needs to be treated as such so victims and supporters are not re-victimized by perpetrators and by society’s lack of responsibility and response.
Yet, as Shalon M. Irving and Jeffrey E. Hall (2018, 21) observe,
“Framing EA [elder abuse] as a crime that threatens the autonomy and rights of frail older adults in community settings (and possibly indicates some level of family dysfunction) directs attention to the abusive act itself and its consequences, yet fails to address the many antecedents and determinants or the implications and costs for communities, thereby reducing the likelihood that attention and resources will be directed at primary prevention of EA.”
The profound implications and substantial societal costs of elder abuse become evident when viewed through the lens of zemiology, a field that offers a broader and more nuanced perspective on social harm compared to traditional criminology.
Zemiology—derived from the Greek word zēmía, meaning “harm”—is a critical approach to the study of crime and social harm that focuses on the social, economic, and political factors that contribute to harm, rather than simply focusing on offenders and victims while failing to capture the full spectrum of damaging behaviors and their impact on individuals and society.
Zemiology adopts a holistic approach that seeks to uncover the root causes of harm and develop interventions to address underlying structural violence. “The arrangements are structural because they are embedded in the political and economic organization of our social world; they are violent because they cause injury to people (typically, not those responsible for perpetuating such inequalities),” note Paul E. Farmer and colleagues (2006, 1686) with reference to Johan Galtung’ seminal work (1969).
Advocating for a zemiological approach, Victoria Canning and Steve Tombs highlight the interconnectedness of social harm and justice. The authors state (2021, 56),
“A focus on crime points us towards a focus on the inter-personal; by contrast, a social harm or zemiological approach leads us more inevitably, or at least more easily, both to understandings and to effective responses located beyond the level of individuals.”
To be complacent is to be complicit
Along my journey, I realized that to be complacent about elder justice is to be complicit in elder abuse. After my father’s trial, I decided to advance my elder justice efforts beyond my grandmother’s case. As I became more vocal and confident in my efforts, I was invited to present keynote addresses from border to border and coast to coast. I met face to face with hundreds of elder justice advocates who, sometimes with so little, have done so much for so many. These years were my listening tour — a rich, rewarding and empowering education.
I am committed to helping combat elder financial exploitation, a crime that can be detected and used as evidence to arrest exploitation and other forms of abuse that are instrumental to theft but are more difficult to arrest, introduce as evidence, and prosecute.
The combined strengths of collaborative partnerships enable effective measures to address and arrest abuse. Such efforts are illustrated in a recent white paper titled All in This Together: Adult Protective Services and Financial Institutions’ Efforts to Combat Elder Financial Exploitation by the NAPSA Financial Exploitation Advisory Board (Joe Snyder, Lara Hinz, Philip C. Marshall; 2023). This white paper helps reduce the “friction that works against the change we see to create.” (Nordgren Schonthal 2021, 3)
While I am still committed to combating financial exploitation, I have embraced a more expansive concept of what it is I am trying to do. I encourage others to do the same. We must go a step further than preventing elder abuse — we must work for elder justice, for a holistic approach to addressing crimes, social harm, healing, and dignity for our future selves.
Why we need a shared definition of elder abuse, in context
My grandmother’s case gained national attention. Most elder-abuse cases are not even known. Only one in 24 cases of elder abuse are reported and only one in 44 cases of elder financial exploitation (the most prevalent form of abuse) are reported — as detailed in Under the Radar (2011).
Mark S. Lachs and Karl A. Pillemer (2015, 1949) note,
“When the available evidence is taken into consideration, an estimated overall prevalence of elder abuse of approximately 10% appears reasonable.”
Over a year, one in ten older citizens are victimized by one or more of the five major types of elder abuse: financial exploitation, physical abuse, psychological or emotional abuse, neglect, and sexual abuse.
Elder abuse is a pervasive, profound, and systemic social problem that cannot be understood or addressed effectively from within its own confines. No system can define its own axioms, which are gained at a greater level. Elder abuse is more constructively viewed through the lens of elder justice that, in turn, must be viewed through the lens of justice, cradled by trust.
To understand elder abuse and exploitation as a violation of our social compact, as a systemic social harm, as a betrayal of trust, and as a crime, it is vital to examine first how society views elder abuse before advancing to elder justice.
Vicki Gottlich (1994, 371, fn. 1) chronicles:
“The term ‘elder abuse’ arose out of the first Congressional hearing on the issue, which was convened in 1978 in Boston, Massachusetts, by the House Select Committee on Aging. The now-defunct Committee attributes the phrase ‘elder abuse’ to the late Claude Pepper (D. Florida), then chairperson of the Aging Committee… Another source states that Legal Research and Services for the Elderly [1979] in Boston coined the term because of its ‘news media appeal.’”
At its essence, elder abuse is a betrayal of trust — aside from all too prevalent fraud (Office of Victims of Crime, U.S. DOJ) and “pure” elder financial exploitation (Shelly Jackson and Thomas L. Hafemeister 2012), which is typically associated with fraud by strangers.
As defined by the World Health Organization (WHO):
“Elder abuse…is 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. This type of violence constitutes a violation of human rights.”
Elder abuse includes financial exploitation, psychological abuse and manipulation, deprivation, neglect (including self-neglect), isolation, abandonment, restraint (physical and chemical), and physical and sexual abuse.
Elder abuse is delivered and endured in many ways. Older citizens may be poly-victimized (enduring more than one form of abuse) and re-victimized. The forms, frequency, and duration of abuse may be intensified and escalated, especially when there is an intimate, long-term relationship between victim and perpetrator. This typically happens with hybrid financial exploitation, when various forms of abuse are strategically deployed to advance the perpetrator’s sinister goals.
Shelly L. Jackson and Thomas P. Hafemeister (2010, 11–12) conclude, among all forms of abuse, hybrid financial exploitation:
“…is perhaps the most entrenched (e.g., it is generally the longest in duration) and intractable (because it is characterized by mutual dependency between the elderly person and the perpetrator), the most difficult for APS [adult protective services] to investigate, and with the most draconian outcomes for the victims of this abuse (e.g., the victim is the most likely to be appointed a guardian).”
Jilenne Gunther, in the introduction of The Scope of Elder Financial Exploitation: What It Costs Victims (AARP Banksafe Initiative, 2023), cites her findings:
“Every year, millions of older Americans lose significant portions of their life savings to elder financial exploitation, and the problem is only growing. During the pandemic, the rate of exploitation doubled, and some pandemic-related forms of exploitation are here to stay.”
Elder abuse is a “serious public health problem” (CDC), a societal epidemic that spreads like a contagious disease. Naming a disease can be harmful, especially if it leads to stigma, discrimination, and society’s dis-ease. Calling something a disease is only beneficial if it guides proactive prevention and intervention — care and, when possible, a cure. New social norms will help reduce contagion and casualties.
In our digital domain, the term elder abuse helps persons search for help or to help informed by rich resources found in programs and services provided by experts. For individuals who wish to expand their search libraries provide a safe, helpful space—highlighted by the Federal Depository Library Program and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (November 14, 2023). In libraries, concerned persons can gain access to professional, peer-review research and resources, exemplified by the Elder Abuse LibGuide (Montana Board of Crime Control).
The term elder abuse advances policies (NCEA Elder Justice Policy Highlights, March-August 2023), statutes (compiled by the Elder Justice Initiative, U.S. Department of Justice), protocol (Christopher Mikton and colleagues, 2022) practices, and advocacy — when informed by peer-reviewed research (NCEA Elder Abuse Annual Research Compilation) and evidence- and value-based practices.
Above, value is employed, over cost-benefit. “Because many cost–benefit analyses are biased against older adults, innovative strategies are needed to capture the range of personal, community, financial, and societal costs of elder abuse,” observes Xin Qi Dong (June 11, 2015; 1233).
Yet, “There is no national consensus on a definition of elder abuse and state definitions vary widely,” concluded Lori A. Stiegel and Erica F. Wood in a paper published over a decade ago (2011, 1). This lack of consensus remains the case today, as exemplified by the wide range of definitions in elder abuse and elder financial exploitation statutes (EJI, DOJ).
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, published “Elder Abuse Surveillance: Uniform Definitions and Recommended Core Data Elements” (2016, 8), compiled by Jeffrey Hall and colleagues. They report,
“…longstanding divergences in the definitions and data elements used to collect information on elder abuse make it difficult to measure elder abuse nationally, compare the problem across states, counties, and cities, and establish trends and patterns in the occurrence and experience of elder abuse.”
Claudia Mahler reports (September 3, 2023; 3) on Violence against and abuse and neglect of older persons (Human Rights Council, United Nations General Assembly Fifty-fourth session (11 September to 6 October 2023). Under “definition” Mahler writes:
“There is still no globally accepted definition of ‘elder abuse’ or ‘abuse against older persons.’ Studies worldwide use different terms to address the topic. Such terms include ‘elder abuse,’ ‘violence against older persons,’ ‘elder maltreatment’ and ‘abuse and exploitation of older people.’ The use of different terminology brings other nuances to the fore.”
It is imperative we agree upon a consistent and comprehensive definition of elder abuse. Terms such as “mistreatment” and “maltreatment” (including NAMRS) minimize this social harm and society’s attempt to address it head-on. Dispensing with the term “elder abuse” would be worse. In 2018, pending the reauthorization of Violence Against Women Act various proposed amendments were considered, including one to remove “elder abuse” from the statute’s universal definition. It was retained (2022 VAWA Reauthorization).
In the future, a consistent definition of elder abuse will advance our understanding of prevalence, consequences, risks, protective factors, intervention, and proactive prevention.
This definition ought to be informed by a Campbell systematic review whose protocol was developed by Christopher Mikton and colleagues in “Protocol: Global elder abuse: A mega-map of systematic reviews on prevalence, consequences, risk and protective factors and interventions” (2022). The protocol’s objectives are “to produce a mega-map which identifies, maps and provides a visual interactive display, based on systematic reviews on all the main aspects of elder abuse in both the community and in institutions, such as residential and long-term care institutions.”
Elder abuse, in its various forms, can manifest as isolation by both society and an abuser. To effectively combat this social harm, the term elder abuse must not be isolated, too. By employing consistent terminology in a greater context, society can gain a deeper understanding of elder abuse’s intricate and multifaceted nature, enabling a more engaged and coordinated response.
SNOMED CT, the world’s most comprehensive clinical terminology and coding system, offers a detailed classification of elder abuse, enabling healthcare providers to document and identify specific forms of abuse with greater precision and nuance. This enhanced understanding facilitates accurate information exchange, guiding value- and evidence-based screening, assessment, assistance, coordination, referral, restorative care, and proactive prevention. SNOMED International is a not-for-profit organization that owns and maintains SNOMED CT, which plays “an essential role in improving the health of humankind by determining standards for a codified language that represents groups of clinical terms.”
SNOWMED’s healthcare information and analytics extend from patient to population — and, now, from healthcare to social care via its nascent Social Care Project. This project signals a shift from traditional clinical use of SNOMED CT in support of information requirements of health care systems to also including the information requirements for social care.
A pilot (Cathy Richardson, 2023) participant in the United States is Gravity Project, “a national public collaborative that develops consensus-based data standards to improve how we use and share information on social determinants of health.”
By employing groundbreaking initiatives, to include the Campbell protocol for a mega-map of elder abuse and SNOMED CT’s healthcare and social care terminologies and analytics, experts can illuminate our understanding of elder abuse and craft effective responses to shape a future where elder abuse is minimized, its impact on individuals and society is mitigated, and social norms are aligned to safeguard our future selves.
Public-health and socio-ecological approaches will be salient in the next essay, on elder justice.
Coming to terms with the term “elder abuse”
“Stop elder abuse,” and other campaigns focusing on negative messages are shortsighted. Such messaging may not be effective in changing people’s behavior and typically create fear and anxiety. Such messaging may inadvertently perpetuate stigmas and stereotypes leading to ageism and discrimination.
The term elder abuse does little to address this social harm, which demands human-ecological (Cornell, Karl Pillemer) and humanitarian solutions that extend far beyond an individual case of elder abuse.
We must come together to stop elder abuse. But first we must consider the term and how it hinders our cause. Society’s view of elder abuse creates a contradiction, which puts our future in jeopardy. Consider the words elder and abuse.
- Elder — America’s public-health triumph of the 20th century gained Americans almost thirty years (Max Roser, 2019). Twenty-first-century citizens have three added decades, which we neglect to protect faithfully and fully.
- Abuse — While citizens’ explicit cognitive salience of elder abuse is low, the incidence of abuse is high. Yongjie Yon and colleagues estimate one in six people 60 years and older experience some form of abuse in community settings annually. (2017).
The term elder abuse can re-victimize people through negative associations that come with being labeled a victim of abuse. Being called a victim can elicit archaic guilt-by-association and blame-the-victim responses. For persons who have been victimized, this leads to feelings of guilt, shame, stigmatization, and isolation. Such conditions can make it difficult for people to get the help they need and for society to advance.
The term elder abuse may be redundant for persons—young and old—with an ageist ambivalence (Lindsey A. Cary and colleagues, 2016). Abuse (or abuti, in Italian) means “used up,” and persons who are ageist feel elders are already used up. For other persons, “elder abuse” is not what they think consciously: it’s subliminal, it’s implicit (Harvard).
Elder-abuser dyad
The word pair “elder-abuser” starts to address the dynamic, dyadic (two-person), and non-reciprocal relationship between an elder victim and their criminal abuser. However, this dualistic approach typically focuses on the vulnerabilities of a victim or the motives of a perpetrator, often in isolation from a broader context. This focus on the anti-social dyad “elder-abuser” neglects a pro-social approach to our human ecology and flourishing.
Social scientists have long observed similarities between people who commit crimes and persons who are “victims” of crime, a phenomenon known as the victim-offender overlap. Yet, “it remains unclear as to whether the victim–offender overlap even exists among older population segments” observe Michael D. Reisig and Kristy Holtfreter (2018, 145).
Focusing on the elder-abuser dyad is a major disservice.
As expressed by Julie Schoen (The Justice Clearinghouse; May 17, 2017),
“We tend to construct elder abuse as a relationship between a ‘perpetrator and a victim’ and typically cast older people as powerless and vulnerable reinforcing stereotypes of older people as passive, vulnerable beings.”
This dualistic approach fails to address contextual support and risk factors adequately. It fails to strengthen our safety networks, which start with caregivers and concerned persons (NYC Elder Abuse Center Helpline) who, in their personal and professional roles, try to fulfill their social responsibility to prevent and respond to elder abuse.
A dualistic approach also fails to place society on center stage to embrace and engage all players: older adults who wish to maintain a lead role in their own lives, their supporting actors, and even bad actors who have temporarily assumed the role of an antagonist.
Elder justice for all of us
In contrast, a campaign to “advance elder justice” emphasizes positive messages that promote respect and understanding for older adults and persons in their circles of support. These messages help create a culture of compassion, capacity, and care that prevents elder abuse in the first place. These messages embrace and empower citizens society-wide. These messages don’t ignore the debilitating nature of “elder abuse” — instead, they point to a higher level on the horizon.
Elder justice is gaining ground as an enlightened and forward-looking framework and plan of action for protecting our elders and our future.
The 2010 Elder Justice Act (ALC) was conceived of by M.T. Connolly and colleagues, who sought to establish a proactive, preventive approach to the issue. Connolly, in The Measure of Our Age: Navigating Care, Safety, Money, and Meaning Later in Life (2023), chronicles its inception eight years before enactment:
“In early 2002, Lauren [Fuller] called to say that [Senator John] Breaux [Chair, Special Committee on Aging] wanted to introduce landmark legislation, and over lunch on Capitol Hill, she asked, “What should this law look like?” I pulled a scrap of paper from my bag and jotted down an outline of the ideas simmering in my head, under the heading: “ELDER JUSTICE ACT OF 2002.”
The Elder Abuse Prevention and Prosecution Act of 2017 (S. 178), while starting with “elder abuse” in its title, declares its intentions by leading with a proactive, purposeful, expansive, forward-looking approach in “prevention,” followed by backward-looking “prosecution.”
Prior to the 2020, the annual New York City conference, at which participants learn about new trends and developments in elder abuse prevention and intervention, was called the NYC Elder Abuse Conference. Organizers (led by JASA) opted to rename the event, which is now called the NYC Elder Justice Conference.
Elder justice is in its infancy compared to other realms that define our legal and moral obligations. For humanity, elder justice can complete, not compete, with other causes. We must be mindful of Hegel’s words (EB, 1999), paraphrased:
Justice is not about one cause or another. Justice is inclusive. It embraces coming full circle to become whole for society and ourselves, including our future selves.
Our social compact, one-to-one
““Neither the life of an individual nor the history of a society can be understood without understanding both.”
— C. Wright Mills. (2000, original work published 1959). The Sociological Imagination. Oxford University Press. p. 3
Traditionally, our “social compact” is an implicit agreement between society and individuals in which people give up some of their freedom in exchange for the protection and benefits society provides.
But when our social compact is viewed as a partnership between society and individuals in equal measure, we recognize that both parties have obligations to each other, that a power imbalance is righted, and that individuals are more empowered.
Psychologist Albert Bandura (1995, 34) observed,
“Personal efficacy is valued not because of reverence for individualism, but because a strong sense of personal efficacy is vital for successful adaptation and change regardless of whether it is achieved individually or by group members working together.”
Considering our social compact in this way can empower us to realize our rights and responsibilities as citizens, make our own choices, and foster trust and cooperation.
Our social compact traditionally favors society, at its expense. Justice, which represents individuals’ rights, corrects this social imbalance to achieve one-to-one equipoise between society and ourselves.
Equal consideration for society and self is at the heart of the equity and trust, which is comprised in guardianship.
On guard, en garde
Above all other relationships between society and self — and far, far beyond any informal “expectation of trust” (WHO) — guardianship embodies our most demanding legal, social, and moral obligation. Arguably, guardianship manifests society’s greatest responsibility held in trust, given courts’ and guardians’ broad-scope fiduciary duties and the profound, asymmetric power imbalance (Niklas Luhmann and colleagues 2017) imposed on persons subject to guardianship in the absence of beneficiary control. “Fiduciary” or “trust” relationships, in which “one party is at the mercy of the other’s discretion” (Weinrib 1975), must be subject to our strictest legal rules, pro-social norms, and moral obligations.
Guardianship abuse and exploitation is a betrayal of trust, a violation of our social compact and constitutional rights, a systemic social harm that undermines democracy, and — all too often — a state-sponsored white-collar crime. As a social harm, “…white-collar crime has the capacity to undermine the trust in the entire sociopolitical system,” expresses Sally S. Simpson (2013, 310).
Our social compact is cradled in trust. The way we provide or deny trust in guardianship can test our social compact between society and self, making us stronger while protecting our future selves.
Gratitude
I am grateful to the following persons for their work and/or review, which has contributed to this essay and the cause:
- Alison Barkoff, Acting Assistant Secretary for Aging and Administrator of the Administration for Community Living
- Cristina Bicchieri, S. J. Patterson Harvie Professor of Social Thought and Comparative Ethics, Philosophy, School of Arts and Sciences, University of Pennsylvania
- Risa Breckman, Executive Director (ret.), NYC Elder Abuse Center
- Lindsey A. Cary, Department of Psychology, The University of Toronto
- Flora Colao, Elder Abuse Helpline Service Specialist and Clinical Supervisor, Elder Abuse Helpline for Concerned Persons, New York City Elder Abuse Center
- Marie-Therese Connelly, Consultant, Elder Justice Lab (profile at USC Center for Elder Justice), author of The Measure of Our Age
- Nancy Cordes, CBS News
- Hilary Dalin, Director, Office of Elder Justice and Adult Protective Services, Administration for Community Living, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
- Criselda DeLaCruz, Grant Program Supervisor, Enhanced Training and Services to End Abuse in Later Life, Montana Board of Crime Control
- Rebekah Diller, Clinical Professor of Law, Co-Director, Cardozo Bet Tzedek Legal Services, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Yeshiva University
- Xin Qi Dong, Rush Institute for Healthy Aging, Rush University Medical Center
- Jenefer Duane, Older Americans Senior Program Analyst (head, Elder Financial Protection and Response Network program), Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
- Nan Gibson, Executive Director, Second Chance, Economic Security Net, and Careers & Skills, JPMorgan Chase Policy Center
- Aaron Gorrell, President, The Justice Clearinghouse
- Vicki Gottlich, Deputy Administrator for Policy and Evaluation, Administration for Community Living, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
- Jilenne Gunther, National Director of BankSafe Initiative, AARP
- Thomas L. Hafemeister, Independent
- Jeffrey E. Hall, Deputy Associate Director for Science, Office of Minority Health and Health Equity, Centers for Disease Control
- Kathryn Haslanger, Chief Executive Officer, JASA (primary sponsor of the NYC Elder Justice Conference)
- Lara E. Hinz, Director of Programs, Women’s Institute for a Secure Retirement (WISER)
- Kristy Holtfreter, Professor, School of Criminology & Criminal Justice (CCJ) and Professor, Office of Gender-Based Violence (OGBV), Arizona State University
- Shelly L. Jackson, Assistant Professor; Institute of Law, Psychiatry and Public Policy; Department of Psychiatry and Neurobehavioral Sciences; University of Virginia
- Anant Jani, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Oxford; Executive Director, Better Value Healthcare, The Collaborating Centre for Values-based practice in Health and Social Care, St Catherine’s College Oxford
- Jason Karlawish, Professor of Medicine, Medical Ethics and Health Policy, and Neurology; Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine; University of Pennsylvania; Director, Penn Program for Precision Medicine for the Brain
- Darius Kingsley, Head of Business Practices, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
- Travis Labrum, Associate Professor, School of Social Work, University of Pittsburgh
- Mark S. Lachs, Chief Medical Officer, NYC Elder Abuse Center
- Elizabeth Loewy, Co-Founder and Chief Operating Officer, Eversafe
- Claudia Mahler, Independent Expert on the enjoyment of all human rights by older persons, United Nations Human Rights
- Andy Mao, Elder Justice Initiative, U.S. Department of Justice
- Art Mason, Director (ret.), Elder Abuse Prevention Program, Lifespan of Greater Rochester
- Christina McCale, Editor-in-Chief, The Justice Clearinghouse
- Christopher Mikton, Department of Social Determinants of Health, World Health Organization
- Jane Isobel Millar, Professor Emeritus, Department of Social & Policy Sciences, University of Bath
- Briget Penhale, Emeritus Reader, School of Health Sciences; Member, Dementia & Complexity in Later Life; School of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia
- Karl Pillemer, Hazel E. Reed Professor in the Department of Psychology, Professor of Gerontology in Medicine at Weill Cornell Medicine
- Michael D. Reisig, Professor, School of Criminology & Criminal Justice, Arizona State University
- Charlene Rooney (Mickey’s wife)
- Max Roser, Founder and Director, Our World in Data
- Julie Schoen, Director, Elder Abuse Guide for Law Enforcement (EAGLE) and Emeritus Consultant, National Center on Elder Abuse (ACL)
- Sally S. Simpson, Distinguished University Professor of Criminology and Criminal Justice and Director of the Center for the Study of Business Ethics, Regulation & Crime (C-BERC), University of Maryland, College Park
- Joe Snyder, Public Policy Chair, National Adult Protective Services Association (NAPSA)
- Phyllis L. Solomon, Professor in the School of Social Policy & Practice and Professor of Social Work in Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania
- Thomas J. Spulak, Chairman and President, The Claude Pepper Foundation; Partner, Government Advocacy and Public Policy, King & Spalding LLP
- Pamela Teaster, Professor, Associate Director for Research Center for Gerontology, Virginia Tech
- Helen D. Wei, Associate Professor, Computer Science Department, School of Business, Stockton University
- Yongjie Yon, Technical Officer, World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe
Full circle…Mickey Rooney
