Lesley Carcary says there are arguments for and against placing surveillance cameras in a family member's home

The use of covert cameras in the home is a controversial issue, but one which is being given serious consideration by some people in recent months. With 8.6% of older people having experienced abuse in their own homes (and these are just those who have spoken up), elder abuse is a shameful blight on our society. Some care homes use cameras, but is doing so in someone’s own home a step too far?

Through Action on Elder Abuse Scotland's helpline, I’ve heard about appalling cases of abuse, neglect and ill-treatment, from verbal and psychological abuse, to horrendous physical abuse. The perpetrators are usually family members or carers, although we also hear of cases involving other workers, bogus tradesmen or neighbours.

As some types of abuse can be difficult to prove, surveillance could provide undisputable evidence, making it easier to secure prosecutions

Lesley Carcary

The most commonly reported type of abuse is financial, with calls to our helpline relating to financial abuse doubling over the last year. However, this type of abuse is often difficult to identify and prove. People with dementia are often specifically targeted as they are less likely to understand what is happening. Unfortunately, this can mean that many believe it’s not happening, assuming the older person is confused, imagining things, or has misplaced money or possessions.

So how do we put an end to this appalling scourge? Should we urge people to install covert cameras as a hard and fast way to expose and prosecute abuse, or is this a massive intrusion of privacy? There’s no denying that all older people have the same rights to privacy, dignity and respect as anyone else.

While I appreciate that surveillance can expose abuse, other less intrusive options can work better. Any vulnerable adult, including anyone concerned about them, can contact their local council who can investigate concerns. In many cases this is likely to be the most appropriate action, rather than an almost vigilante option of taking matters into your own hands.

On the other hand, as some types of abuse can be difficult to prove, surveillance could provide undisputable evidence, making it easier to secure prosecutions. We spoke to Simon Berlin a few months ago who installed cameras in his mother’s home after he suspected her carer was stealing from her. The cameras proved that the carer had indeed been stealing, leading to a conviction – something Simon believed wouldn’t have happened if he hadn’t installed the cameras.

So what’s the way forward? I can see the benefits of surveillance and appreciate it may work in some situations. However I’d only support it if the older person (or whoever they’ve appointed to make decisions on their behalf) has full control over its use, there’s a strong reason to suspect abuse, and if there is no other way of resolving the issue.

I do think, however, that this debate diverts from the real issue, which is that all older people should have the right to high-quality care, support and dignity, and no one should be living in fear of abuse, degradation or ill-treatment”.

Lesley Carcary is director of Action on Elder Abuse Scotland. To join the debate on CCTV in relation to tackling financial abuse, book your place at AEA Scotland’s national conference on 13 June.