Suggestions for rephrasing were:
“Do you feel that someone is stopping you from doing what you want to do?”
“Is anyone stopping you from seeing people you want to see?”
“Can you do what you want to do? Can you see whom you want to see?”
“Are you prevented from doing things that are important to you by someone you know?”
“How often are you prevented from doing things that are important to you by some- one you know? Is that ‘never’, ‘sometimes’, ‘often’ or ‘almost always’?”
Question 8: Participants thought this question was very important for detect- ing financial abuse, as it helps to delve into different aspects of financial dependence and abuse. Again, however, the wording was complicated and confusing, and some argued that the two issues in the first part of the question should be treated sepa- rately as they were about different things: (i) misuse of money or assets, and (ii) being forced to sign documents. Some suggested splitting the question into two questions, for example:
“Has anyone used or tried to use your money, possessions or property in ways that you did not want?”
“Has anyone (you trust) made you sign documents that you did not understand or did not want to sign?”
“Are you able to access your own money when you need it?”
Since answering “yes” to any of these would indicate suspicion, the doctors again felt the second part of the question (whether the event was isolated event) was unnecessary.
It was mentioned that the wording of this question needed improvement. e phrase “Has anyone that you would trust” seemed rather complicated, and it was felt that perhaps the “trust” element did not matter so much. Someone commented that if the person was stealing from you or misusing your property, you most likely no longer trusted them. Also, a suggested alternative to the word “forced” to sign documents was “made” to sign, as this was less likely to imply a physical coercion.
Question 9: e likelihood of alcohol- induced violence was considered a very important issue, but both groups strongly recommended that illicit drug use should be added. ere were also concerns about the intent of the question, because it implied that someone drinking too much alcohol was necessarily a cause for concern. Participants felt that the more important element here was whether or not someone’s drinking or drug-taking habits adversely af- fected the older person. It was also stressed that the perpetrator of substance-induced abuse did not have to live with the older person in order to abuse them, and so the first phrase was redundant.