Residents subjected to the alleged events which occurred this time in a New South Wales nursing home, which included the horrors of:

• having resident's genitalia photographed for some sick game;
• depriving a dying man of food; and
• taunting a dementia resident;

Sadly, none of these events satisfied the official government requirements of the "compulsory reporting" regime that was introduced in 2007 to purportedly "protect" residents in aged care.  Although in this case the provider optionally contacted the department, there was no requirement to do so. 

"Compulsory reporting" laws were introduced in 2007, as a result of alleged sexual assaults in a Victorian nursing home. 

Prior to the introduction of the "compulsory reporting" regime, concerns at the time pointed to the limits of the proposed Bill in addressing all potential forms of abuse of people in aged care facilities. 

These concerns included poor nutrition, hydration, hygiene, verbal and emotional abuse or financial fraud.

The Government's inability to recognise elder abuse for what it is, and to so narrowly define the requirements, has resulted in a failure in protecting older people in care.  It is also at odds with the World Health Organisation and the government's promotion of (annual) World Elder Abuse day. 

What type of message does this send out?  That it's not elder abuse when frail and older seniors are taunted, deprived, or used in some mindless game?

Do we really know how many cases like this are occuring across Australia - inside or outside nursing homes?  How many other cases in residential aged care are "micro-managed" to avoid public scrutiny, or just swept under the carpet?  We don't collect the information, so therefore we just don't know. 

Imagine if we didn't know the prevalence of heart attacks, diabetes, car accidents, or similar? 

Information should be readily available so that researchers can document important issues for analysis and trends, as well as public scrutiny to highlight the issue of elder abuse.

Age and frailty should not be a reason to exclude seniors from at the very least the collection of this important information.

Is it a case of we simply don't know, don't care, or both?