Elder Neglect Case Summary

Elder neglect is defined as a caregiver withholding an elder of their needs. These needs include shelter, food, water, safety, and etc. Mr. B failed to provide his father with basic safety when he could no longer make those decisions for himself. Dr. Y did make the right choice concerning the fact that it is her duty to report Mr. B’s elder neglect with his father. In reporting Mr. B’s neglect, Dr. Y would have to compile her evidence against Mr. B and take action quickly. Although Mr. B is a client of Dr. Y her legal obligations as a mandated reporter out weighs the ethical concerns of violating secrecy and the loss of a client as a repercussion of reporting elder neglect. According to ethical standards Dr. Y is allowed to disclose information

Y should establish and have evidence readily available. The first key to the neglect case is Mr. B’s father suffers from Alzheimer’s disease. Secondly, Mr. B has told Dr. Y that he is struggling with balancing taking care of his father, family, and work; also it is a known fact that Mr. B is diagnosed with depression. Thirdly, he has expressed concern for his father still driving. Fourthly, Mr. B confessed that he paid out of pocket for his father’s previous fender benders rather than contacting the insurance company for fear of legal repercussions. This piece of evidence is key because it shows guilt and that he knows that allowing his father to drive is wrong. Fifthly, Mr. B does not deny or argue with Dr. Y’s concerns, he simply yells and tells the doctor that his family was none od her business. Finally, Mr. B agreed to take steps to prevent his father from driving, but failed to stay true to his word when his father got into yet another accident. The difference with this particular accident was that it obviously was damaging enough to be published in a newspaper. By preponderance of the evidence against Mr. B he is guilty of elder neglect. According to the scenario, some psychologists might think that Dr. Y may be acting too early because no one has been harmed yet. Although, just because a someone has not been harmed yet does not justify that someone will not yet get hurt. One question for these psychologists would be: when should