The purpose and objective of this analysis of crime and the elderly is to prove, through a review and analysis of recent research literature from the field of criminal justice, that while elderly people tend to consider themselves particularly vulnerable to becoming victims of crime, they actually constitute a demographic group that is least likely to be victimized (Smith & Torstensson, 1997).
Approaching the subject by applying the framework of the lifestyle theory of crime, as defined and explained by Davis, Lurigio, and Herman (2007), the elderly are hypothesized to be the cohort that is least prone to victimization because they are the most likely to avoid the types of high-risk activities that expose individuals to the risks of victimization. The implications of substantiating this hypothesis through empirical support are significant because evidence that can be provided to both contest and assuage elderly people’s fears regarding victimization may be able to help them live in greater peace, rather than feel themselves to be held hostage by fears that are not supported by facts.
Before turning to the research literature on the subject of crime victimization patterns in the United States and, in particular, the perceptions of and actual experiences of victimization reported by elderly people, it is important to establish a working definition of the conceptual framework that is being applied to approach the subject. The lifestyle theory of crime perpetration and victimization, which is also referred to as the routine activity theory or the rational choice perspective, posits that “all criminal activity is opportunistic and rational rather than the result of innate forces within the offender” (Davis et al., 2007, p. 170). The basic assumption of the lifestyle theory of crime, as opposed to the social process theory, is that “criminal acts [can be attributed to] situational variables and [arise] from transactions between individuals” (Davis et al., 2007, p 170).
While the lifestyle theory of crime is often applied more to the study of criminals than to the study of victims, recent research has begun to examine how lifestyle choices made by victims make them more or less vulnerable to suffering from the willful violations of criminals (Davis et al., 2007). Although the lifestyle theory of victimization is somewhat controversial, especially for certain types of crimes and among certain demographic groups because some victim advocates believe it evokes a blame-the-victim mentality and contests the popular notion of the “luckless individual” who is victimized unwittingly, what it proposes is that “particular persons run greater risk of becoming victims because of choices they make (or choices they are forced into because of their circumstances) concerning lifestyle, friends, and places frequented….” (Davis et al., 2007, p. 170). While the theory itself does not imply that the victim is “asking for it,” what it does propose is that such choices increase the likelihood that the individual will find himself or herself “crossing paths with persons [who have] the motivation to engage in criminal behavior” (Davis et al., 2007, p. 170).
The lifestyle theory of victimization goes on to postulate that once the path of the criminal and his or her potential victim have crossed, the latter makes choices that are likely to either minimize the risk of victimization or to increase it considerably (Davis et al., 2007). There are three typical patterns of choice that increase risk: (1) “obvious provocation”; (2) “carelessness”; and, (3) “passive cooperation” (Davis et al., 2007, p. 170). Among the elderly, carelessness and passive cooperation are the most likely behaviors that will make them more prone to victimization if they have made a lifestyle choice that has brought them to a point where they are crossing paths with a criminal (Smith & Torstensson, 1997). However, it is important to point out that the vast majority of elderly people will never cross paths with a potential offender, as they are far more likely than other age cohorts to engage in risk-averse behavior that makes them less vulnerable to predatory criminal behavior. Although age has been verified to be “one of the strongest correlates of victimization,” it is people between the ages of 20-24 who are most likely to be victims of both violent and non-violent crime (Davis et al., 2007). Crime victimization rates drop sharply after the age of 25, and dwindle to an almost negligible rate among people 65 and older (Davis et al., 2007). Specifically, as Davis et al. (2007) point out, “elderly persons may spend considerable time at home, often do not work, and tend to associate with older friends or family members” (p. 13). All of these variables decrease their likelihood to be victimized exponentially (Davis et al., 2007).
Despite such evidence, the elderly are occasional victims of crime, and the media play a significant role in sensationalizing criminal acts committed against this age cohort. Crime against any victim is abhorrent and against the elderly is perhaps most reprehensible, but media distortions convey the perception that elderly people are disproportionately susceptible to becoming victims of violent and non-violent crime (Davis et al., 2007). Such misinformation and the generation of misperceptions instill fear among older people that is unfounded. As Lisa, Sanchirico, and Reed (1988) explain, “fear and constrained social behavior are part of a positive escalating loop (fear constrains social behavior which increases fear) and…the strength of the loop is contingent on age” (p. 827). While the relationship between fear and socially avoidant behavior is an important one, it is equally crucial to acknowledge the possibility that this fear may have a self-protective function to the extent that it promotes the kind of withdrawal behavior that protects the elderly from victimization. As Smith and Torstensson (1997) remark, “why the least victimized by violence… are most fearful is a central paradox in the fear of crime literature” (p. 608).
How fearful are the elderly, what, exactly, do they fear, and how do they tend to behave when confronted with the potential of actually being victimized? These are questions that are answered by recent research on the subject of perceptions of victimization and actual experiences of criminal victimization among this particular age cohort. There is a great deal of research on the subject that dates back to the late 1970s and 1980s, and though the topic appears to have been less popular in the past 20 years, it is likely that the subject will gain a resurgence again, considering that the elderly is the fastest-growing age demographic in the United States. Still, some recent research is available that sheds light on the fearfulness of the elderly with respect to crime, as well as their typical patterns of behavior when confronting situations of potential victimization.
When considering the findings that are presented in the research, it is important to keep in mind that the elderly tend to exist on the margins of our society. While many other cultures revere their elderly, older people in the United States are often all but invisible, which makes it difficult to learn about their fears, perceptions, and actual experiences in many areas of social life, and, in particular, about crime. This characteristic peculiar to American society already obscures our understanding of elderly people’s perceptions of and experiences with crime, rendering them silent except in the case of media portrayals of shocking cases of victimization. The problem is compounded, however, according to Safarik, Jarvis, and Nussbaum (2002) by the fact that the elderly are far less likely than other age cohorts to report specific types of crime, especially those that are sexual in nature, as they are embarrassed by what has happened to them and are fearful of revenge or reprisal. As Safarik et al. (2002) are careful to point out, though, these types of crime are exceptionally rare, and are often perpetrated by individuals with diagnosed or diagnosable mental illnesses. In other words, the lifestyle theory tends not to be applicable to the criminal in these types of crimes against the elderly.
The lifestyle theory does, however, help to explain the vulnerability of the elderly victim and also helps to identify typical behavioral patterns in response to the would-be criminal on the part of the potential elderly victim (Safarik et al., 2002). As Safarik et al. (2002) and Smith and Torstensson (1997) have reported, the elderly are far more likely than other age cohorts to promote the committal of the criminal act once their paths have crossed with the criminal. While they are far less likely than other age cohorts, for example, to put themselves in places and situations where they might be victimized, they are much more likely to engage in behaviors—albeit unaware to them—that promote the possibility of victimization once they are in contact with a potential perpetrator. Home thefts of the elderly, for instance, occur when an individual, believing a visitor’s stated intentions, opens the door to a would-be criminal. When the elderly person realizes the error in cognitive processing, insight, or judgment, he or she is likely to not resist any demands made by the criminal (Safarik et al., 2002), either out of fear (Safarik et al., 2002), or due to physical inability (Smith & Torstensson, 1997). Elderly are more likely, however, to try verbal reasoning with the criminal, a strategy which is typically ineffective and which often causes the danger of a criminal encounter to escalate considerably (Safarik et al., 2002).
The studies by Safarik et al. (2002) and Smith and Torstensson (1997) substantiate the claim made by Davis et al. (2007) and by this writer that crime victimization rates among the elderly are far lower than they are for almost every other age cohort, with the exception, perhaps, of infants. At the same time, however, both studies also support the notion that the lifestyle theory of crime victimization is applicable to an analysis of patterns of victimization among this demographic group. While the elderly are likely to interact only with people who they know well, while they are likely to constrict their activities to familiar places (church, home, the homes of family members and friends, senior citizen activity and recreation centers, etc.), and while they are less likely than every other age cohort to engage in high-risk behaviors that expose them to potential criminals, they are also far more likely than every other age group to engage in two out of the three typical behaviors that spur on the criminal to commit his or her act once the criminal and victim have crossed one another’s paths. Whether through carelessness—such as opening the door of one’s home without verifying a visitor’s identity—or through passive resistance, a would-be elderly victim does often contribute to the extent to which he or she is victimized, even if such acts are unintentional and even committed unwittingly.
The importance of these findings is considerable. First, the elderly would benefit from advertising campaigns that explain the statistical facts about their likelihood of being victimized. Dispelling the popularly held misconception that elderly people are exceptionally vulnerable to crime would help liberate elderly people from psychological prisons of fear. Second, coupling advertising campaigns with an educational component would help to inform elderly people about ways in which they can make lifestyle choices that promote their safety rather than increase their vulnerability to victimization. Third, public advocates and the criminal justice system should consider improving existing systems for reporting crimes among the elderly. The elderly are less likely than some other age demographics to report crimes because of a number of reasons, among them, physical disabilities that prevent them from being able to make in-person reports, as well as the emotional scars of shame that persist long after victimization has occurred. Facilitating reporting procedures for the elderly would likely help expand our awareness and understanding of how the elderly contribute to and ward against victimization.
It is widely understood that the elderly population in the United States is increasing and is poised to become the largest age demographic in the coming years. While many public health and criminal justice scholars and advocates are working to improve the quality of life for elderly people, there is much more research to be conducted and public policy action to be developed and implemented that will help this age cohort cope with some of the hidden challenges and realities of ageing. While elderly people are far less likely than every other age cohort to be victims of crime, the fear that is pervasive among this age cohort is often paralyzing, robbing individuals from enjoying what could be the golden years of their lives. It is important that the findings of research in the criminal justice and social science fields be made accessible and in a format that is clear and readable, for elderly people so that they can adjust their perceptions of crime and victimization—as well as their behaviors—accordingly. Furthermore, it is important that the lifestyle choice theory of victimization not be used as an excuse to blame the victim, but that it be used as an educational tool for protecting the elderly against becoming victims of crime through their own naivete or passivity, whether chosen or otherwise. Research has the power to convert the quantitative data of science into qualitative knowledge that can be used to improve the qualify of life of elderly people, as well as our communities at large. Future research should be focused on expanding awareness of co-related variables, such as race, gender, and sexual orientation, and should be action-oriented so that results can be immediately transferred for practical use into the environment.
Related Articles
Substance Abuse Among the Elderly
References
Davis, R.C., Lurigio, A.J., & Herman, S.A., Eds. (2007). Victims of crime. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lisa, A.E., Sanchiriko, A., & Reed, M.D. (1988). Fear of crime and constrained behavior specifying and estimating a reciprocal effects model. Social Forces, 66(3), 827-837.
Safarik, M.E., Jarvis, J.P., & Nussbaum, K.E. (2002). Sexual homicide of elderly females: Linking offender characteristics to victim and crime scene attributes. Journal ofInterpersonal Violence, 17(5), 500-525.
Smith, W.R., & Torstensson, M. (1997). Gender differences in risk perception and neutralizing fear of crime: Toward resolving the paradoxes. The British Journal of Criminology, 37, 608-634.
