Forum
The Gerontologist	
Vol. 50, No. 2, 149–157	
doi:10.1093/geront/gnp102

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Gerontological Society of America.
All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.
Advance Access publication on June 25, 2009

Silver Alerts and the Problem of Missing Adults
with Dementia
Dawn Carr, PhD,1,2 Glenn W. Muschert, PhD,2 Jennifer Kinney, PhD,2
Emily Robbins, MA,2 Gina Petonito, PhD,2 Lydia Manning, MGS,2
and J. Scott Brown, PhD2
In the months following the introduction of the National AMBER (America’s Missing: Broadcast Emergency Response) Alert plan used to locate missing
and abducted children, Silver Alert programs began
to emerge. These programs use the same infrastructure and approach to find a different missing population, cognitively impaired older adults. By late 2008,
17 states had enacted Silver Alert policies, and several more planned to take advantage of National
Silver Alert grant funding to initiate policies in 2009.
To date, however, no research has examined the efficacy of such programs, which have widely varying
parameters and criteria to initiate the alerts. In this
study, we empirically examine the 17 existing state
Silver Alert and related policies. The analysis includes
an examination of the varieties of programs: dementia related and AMBER extension, the dates of enactment, the criteria for activation, and the process of
activation. We conclude with two salient questions
that emerged from the analysis. We examine these
questions and make recommendations for future research, including examining whether Silver Alerts
are an appropriate response to address the problem
of missing adults with dementia or cognitive impairments and examining the costs and benefits of the
programs including determining how best to balance
1
Address correspondence to Dawn Carr, Department of Sociology and
Gerontology, Miami University, 375 Upham Hall, Oxford, OH 45056.
E-mail: carrdc@muohio.edu
2
Department of Sociology and Gerontology, Miami University,
Oxford, Ohio.

Vol. 50, No. 2, 2010

efforts to keep cognitively impaired elders safe while
keeping their basic human rights of autonomy and
empowerment intact.
Key Words:  Silver Alert, Cognitive impairment,
Missing persons, Dementia, Wandering

In September 2008, the U. S. government enacted legislation to promote the establishment of
“Silver Alert” policies throughout the nation. In
general, these policies are an outgrowth of the perceived success of the AMBER (America’s Missing:
Broadcast Emergency Response) Alert system used
to identify and return missing children; some, in
fact, are merely adaptations of AMBER programs
to older adults. These Silver Alert and related media alert programs provide information to media
outlets (including the Department of Transportation to activate roadside signs) and/or activate an
emergency alert system through law enforcement
agencies when an adult is reported missing. Despite some variations, adults with significant cognitive impairments are the central focus of these
programs.
Currently, Silver Alert and related programs are
in place in 17 states, and several additional states
have Silver Alert bills scheduled on their 2009 legislative agendas. Of the 17 programs in place, 13
were established by February 2007. The rapidity
of the introduction of Silver Alert programs may
be due to the fact that enacting these programs

149

have been described by many legislators and service providers as a “no-brainer” because they are
inexpensive (due to the use of existing infrastructure in place for the AMBER Alerts program). Silver Alert policies have also been depicted as being
essential to prepare society for some of the impending problems associated with the rapidly aging
population and a corresponding increase in the
number of older adults with cognitive impairments
who have the potential to wander outside their
home and become missing.
On the surface, Silver Alert programs seem
beneficial. They are designed to help formal and
informal caregivers to older adults with dementia
or cognitive impairments by facilitating a societal
effort to help find older people if they go missing.
Yet the creation of stringent surveillance mechanisms may threaten the civil liberties of those with
dementia or cognitive impairments. These complex issues have important implications for the
way Silver Alert programs are conceptualized and
implemented. This article critically examines state
Silver Alert policies, outlining social science
knowledge about the problem and documenting
how the programs are designed in order to create
a foundation or framework to evaluate the efficacy of Silver Alert programs.
Background
Provider organizations that support individuals
and families dealing with Alzheimer’s disease, related dementias, and other cognitive impairments
appear to strongly support the introduction of
Silver Alert policies in the United States. In fact, some
provider organizations note that the growing number of older people expected in the future warrants
the development of better mechanisms such as the
Silver Alerts and other technologies to keep track
of individuals with cognitive diseases related to aging (Alzheimer’s Association, 2008a). Similarly,
media accounts of individuals with dementia wandering off and being found dead in different communities suggest that this is a serious problem.
Silver Alert programs have certainly received strong
legislative support, and the political power appears
to be related to the targeted attention given to
keeping track of older adults with dementia or
cognitive impairments who may become lost and
find themselves in dangerous situations. Despite
this political support, little research on media alerts
used to find adults and older adults, in particular,
has been evaluated.

The Problem of “Wandering” in the Context of
Dementia
“Wandering” has emerged as a particularly
challenging behavior for caregivers of individuals
with dementia or other cognitive impairments.
Wandering behavior may be caused by several factors, including a side effect of medication; stress;
confusion related to time; restlessness, agitation,
anxiety, and/or fear; and/or inability to recognize
familiar objects, people, or places. Although many
existing definitions of and research on wandering
frame it as a problem that must be controlled and,
optimally, prevented (Dewing, 2006), many people
with dementia do not fit a “textbook definition” of
wandering such as “to move about without a definite destination or purpose” (Alzheimer’s Association, 2008b). In fact, wandering is often viewed as
beneficial to individuals with dementia (Robinson
et al., 2007); it is often purposeful in that the individuals may be searching for something that is lost,
trying to locate a familiar person or environment,
and/or trying to fulfill a former responsibility.
Estimates of the incidence and/or prevalence of
wandering by individuals with dementia vary
widely. In part, this could reflect a lack of clarity as
to whether incidence or prevalence rates are being
reported. For example, Pomerantz (2006) reports
that approximately 12% of people with dementia
who live at home wander. By contrast, the
Alzheimer’s Association (2008b) indicates that 6
out of 10 people with Alzheimer’s disease will
wander, and Silverstein, Flaherty, and Salmons
(2002) reported that at some point in the disease
process, all individuals with dementia wander.
Given recent estimates that approximately 4.5 million adults are living with Alzheimer’s disease, a
number that is estimated to quadruple over the
next 40 years (Alzheimer’s Association, 2007),
these variations suggest that wandering at least has
the potential to be a severe problem. However,
there is obvious disagreement regarding the extent
and nature of the problem.
Among individuals with Alzheimer’s disease,
dementia, or other cognitive impairments who do
wander, the outcomes can be catastrophic. Understanding the unique varieties of people who do
wander is therefore useful to addressing this problem. Rowe and Glover (2001) and Rowe and Bennett (2003) found that the majority of individuals
with Alzheimer’s disease who wander are male,
wander away on foot, and are typically found
within five miles of their place of residence. Rowe

150

The Gerontologist

and Glover did not find an association between
time of day and wandering away. Data from the
National Alzheimer’s Association Safe Return program collected during a 13-month period show
that the majority (87%) of individuals with dementia who wander are typically found alive and
returned safely within 12 hr of their departure time
(Rowe and Glover). However, the 4-year (1998–
2002) retrospective study of U.S. newspaper articles conducted by Rowe and Bennett indicates that
among wandering-related deaths of individuals
with dementia, 87% were found dead in a secluded
area. The discrepancy between these studies may
reflect the greater newsworthiness of cases of
wandering that end in injury or fatality. It is troubling that with such scarce research on the subject,
the impetus for most Sliver Alert programs is locating older adults with cognitive impairments,
primarily dementias.
Analysis of State Silver Alert Policies
In analyzing the Silver Alert and related media
alert programs intended to help identify missing
older adults, we examine and discuss the patterned
characteristics of state programs. Due to the absence
of scholarly literature on these programs, data are
derived solely from a national report (National
Association of State Units on Aging, 2008), state legislation documents, and media reports. The sources
used in this research are listed in the Appendix.
Varieties of Media Alerts for Missing Adults
As is evident in Table 1, Silver Alert and related
media alert programs are identified by different
names. Through our analysis, two varieties emerged
as salient categories of media alerts for missing
adults: those which expand AMBER Alert policies
and those focused on adults with cognitive impairments (e.g., dementia). Although both program
types build upon the infrastructure of AMBER
Alerts, they differ in their philosophy and purpose.
The first type, “AMBER extension,” was created
in response to the belief that AMBER Alerts are
too limited and that mechanisms should be in place
to help find missing adults, not just missing children. The second type of program, the “dementia
focused,” was created directly in response to the
concerns that adults with dementia or other cognitive impairments wander and become missing.
These two varieties vary based on the target population that is of central concern.
Vol. 50, No.2, 2010

Uses of Technology in Monitoring Older Adults
With Dementia or Cognitive Impairments.—The
literature on family caregiving suggests that the
safety of a relative with dementia is an overriding
concern for family caregivers (e.g., Kinney, Kart,
Murdoch, & Ziemba, 2003). An emerging literature on the use of monitoring technology in the
context of dementia demonstrates that there are
family members who deploy Internet-based monitoring technologies in their home despite the reality (and, perhaps, hope) that the technology might
not ever be activated (e.g., Kinney, Kart, Murdoch,
& Conley, 2004; Kinney & Kart, 2005). This
might reflect a larger issue in caregiving, whereby
caregivers are determined to exert as much agency
and/or control as possible over what they may
view as a largely uncontrollable situation. At the
societal level, the Safe Return program, which was
administered by the Alzheimer’s Association, was
established as the first government-funded program to use community resources to assist caregivers in locating individuals with dementia who go
missing and help raise attention to the dangers of
problems like wandering. The use of media alerts
are enticing because they appear to help assure the
safety of individuals; thus, it is not surprising that
caregivers and family members of individuals with
dementia as well as the Alzheimer’s Association
support this form of technology.
AMBER Alerts and Their Extensions.—The first
AMBER Plan was established in July 1997 in the
Dallas, TX, area as a response to Amber Hagerman’s
1996 abduction. AMBER Alerts, when activated,
elicit a coordinated effort in the community
through law enforcement agencies, the media,
and the public to find a missing child. Although
AMBER Alerts have been criticized for providing
an expensive solution that targets a rare variety
of child abductions (Griffin, Miller, Hoppe,
Rebideaux, & Hammack, 2007; Muschert, YoungSpillers, & Carr, 2006), AMBER plans have been
viewed as the primary solution to child abduction
problems and were designed to quickly alert the
public so that citizens can be on the lookout for
missing children.
Like the visibility created by the kidnapping
of Amber Hagerman, stories about missing elders
with dementia, often with tragic endings, have been
linked with discussions of the potential benefits of
instituting Silver Alert programs in many states
(e.g., Kim, 2008; Petonito, Muschert, Manning, &

151

Table 1.  Characteristics of Media Alert Programs for Missing Adults
Type of program

Year

State

2001
2005
2006

Michigan
Utah
Georgia
Illinois
Colorado
Oklahoma
Virginia

2007

Missouri
North Carolina
Texasa
2008

New Mexico
South Dakota
Montana
Louisiana
Kentucky
Delaware
Florida

Program name
AMBER Alert
MEPA
Maddie’s Call
Silver Alert
Silver Alert
Silver Alert
Missing Person’s
Advisory
MEPA
Silver Alert
Texas Silver
Alert Program
MEPA
MEPA
MEPA
Silver Alert
Golden Alert
Gold Alert
Silver Alert

Dementia
focused

AMBER
extension
X
X

X
X
X
X
X

Age criteria

18+

60+

Health criteria

“At risk”

X
(Implied)
(Implied)
(Implied)

X
X
X
X
X
X

X
(Implied)
X
X

X
X

(Implied)
X

X
X
X

X
X
X
X

X
X

(Implied)
(Implied)
(Implied)

X
X

X
X

X
X

X

Dementia
or related
impairment

X
X

X

Notes: MEPA = Missing and Endangered Person’s Advisory.
a
Texas requires that individuals be 65 years or older and that they are diagnosed with a cognitive impairment by a medical
doctor to qualify for a Silver Alert.

Bhatta, 2009). Through Kristen’s Act, passed in
October 2008, the National Center for Missing
Adults (NCMA) (2007) created a clearinghouse
for missing adults in the United States and is also
intended to provide funds to help find missing
adults older than 18 years who were considered
“at risk” or endangered. This program raised
attention regarding the need for a systematic approach to identifying individuals who do not qualify for the enactment of AMBER Alerts.
“AMBER Extension” Programs.—Several states
have enacted programs to help locate adults who
go missing in an effort to compensate for the limitations imposed by the AMBER Alert program. In
2001, Michigan expanded its AMBER Alert program to include those individuals not otherwise covered by AMBER Alerts, focusing on using the
AMBER Alert infrastructure to help locate individuals aged 60 years and older who go missing. Several
other states have subsequently followed suit, though
many do not specify age limits (as is further discussed
in the analysis subsequently), introducing programs
that more broadly target missing persons who do
not fit the AMBER Alert criteria (i.e., all adults). In

2005, for example, Utah enacted a Missing Person’s
Advisory, targeted to people considered “at risk”
but who do not otherwise meet the criteria for an
AMBER Alert. Other states appear to use a similar
rationale, with slight variations in regard to the criteria for enactment. As indicated in the program descriptions, they are intended to help identify missing
adults who could be in potentially dangerous situations (see Table 1).
“Dementia-Focused” Programs.—The model of
AMBER Alerts as a media response system is recognized as a useful way to assist in finding missing
adults. But discussions about the importance of
Silver Alerts in particular have centered on those
adults who are at the highest risk of becoming
missing. As a result, several states enacted media
alert programs with a focus on helping locate individuals with cognitive impairments who go missing (see Table 1).
These two varieties of media alerts—those
seeking to include those individuals who go missing who are not otherwise covered by AMBER
Alerts (AMBER extension) and those seeking to
help identify adults with dementia who wander

152

The Gerontologist

and go missing (dementia focused)—are conceptualized here as varieties of Silver Alerts for the
purposes of this analysis despite the differences in
the actual names of the programs from one state
to the next.
Characteristics of State Silver Alert Programs
Particularly interesting is the speed with which
Silver Alert programs were enacted, beginning with
Michigan in 2001 (see Table 1). Whereas state legislation frequently endures long subcommittee
processes and rigorous debate, these programs
sailed through the legislative process with near
universal support in as little as 1 month from the
bill’s introduction. Indeed, in Florida, the legislative process was bypassed altogether by the establishment of a Silver Alert program via a
gubernatorial order. The federal Silver Alert program, conceptualized as the dementia-focused variety of media alerts, was passed with similar ease
in mid-September 2008 and provides grant funding to states to institute a plan. With this financial
incentive, it is likely that many other states will
adopt plans in the near future. In fact, several states
have already passed legislation and are awaiting
the final introduction of such programs (e.g., Ohio)
or are seriously considering alert programs or have
legislation pending (e.g., California, Connecticut,
Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Missouri, New York,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina,
Tennessee, Washington, and West Virginia [see
Kim, 2008]).
Across states, the criteria used to activate a
Silver Alert reveal some inconsistencies. Although
the Silver Alert plan is often touted as a solution to
the problem of missing adults with dementia or
cognitive impairments, in some states, the criteria
for activating a Silver Alert does not call for missing adults to have cognitive impairments or mental
disabilities. Other policies have age requirements,
and most limit initiation of alerts to those missing
adults aged 60 or 65 years (Texas). Some state
programs do not have any age requirements but
rely on other criteria for initiation such as disability status, cognitive impairment, or that people are
considered to be “at risk” by virtue of either their
age or their health status.
Dementia-focused Silver Alert programs tend to
focus on just that, adults with dementia; however,
there are some variations in how they are structured. For all these programs, to activate an alert,
a missing adult must have dementia or a related
Vol. 50, No.2, 2010

cognitive impairment. Texas has stringent guidelines (an individual must have been diagnosed with
dementia by a doctor), but for most, observed
behaviors that suggest cognitive impairment warrant an alert activation. Some states set a minimum
age threshold in addition to the requirement of
cognitive impairment. As noted in the Table 1, 5 of
the 10 programs in this category have age requirements differentiating them as age-based policies.
The remaining programs either specify that an individual must be aged 18 years or older (North
Carolina and Kentucky) or do not have age
requirements, implying that individuals must be aged
18 years or older because they would otherwise
qualify for an AMBER Alert (Georgia, Illinois, and
Oklahoma).
Of the seven AMBER extension Silver Alert
programs, only two (Michigan and Delaware)
have age requirements of 60 years or older. For
the remaining programs (Utah, Missouri, New
Mexico, South Dakota, and Montana), age is
(implicitly) 18 years or older. Unlike the dementiafocused Silver Alerts, AMBER extension policies
tend to be less stringent about specific health issues that might warrant activation. Rather, these
programs use language that suggests that an alert
can be activated if someone is considered “at
risk” of becoming harmed (or potentially harming another person). As seen in the Table 1, four
state programs specify that someone must be described as “at risk,” whereas the others leave the
decision to activate an alert in the hands of law
enforcement.
The processes for activating Silver Alerts have
substantial variations from one state to the next.
Some states provide very specific guidelines about
the procedure to be followed and others allow law
enforcement agencies to decide what the best
approach for finding an individual may be given
the unique details of each case. In general, however, the process for initiating an alert mimics that of
AMBER Alerts, whereby media outlets, law
enforcement, and often the Department of Transportation are involved in disseminating information
to the public. Many states require the involvement
of broader search organizations such as the Bureau
of Criminal Identification (e.g., Utah) and the
National Crime Information Center (Georgia).
Overall, however, the process of activation for
each state varies widely. For example, in Montana,
the Division of Criminal Investigation issues an
advisory through the National Weather Service,
the Montana Department of Transportation, and

153

the Montana Lottery. The media is informed
either in a specific region or statewide depending
on the case, and they are notified via the Weather
Service System via e-mail or fax. The requesting
agency is expected to send the advisory to border
points of entry or other public agencies as deemed
necessary. Missouri, by comparison, allows alerts
to be initiated by law enforcement agencies in
whatever way they deem appropriate. In North
Carolina, all law enforcement agencies must submit alert requests to a missing person’s center and
that organization decides whether or not to issue
the alert. The efficacy of these processes has not
been empirically tested.
Concluding Remarks
The policy development related to Silver Alerts
programs has been rapid and largely unquestioned.
Given the minimal knowledge about missing older
adults with dementia and cognitive impairments,
this analysis suggests a variety of social scientific
questions, two of which we believe warrant attention before additional resources are invested in
similar programs of this type: (a) are Silver Alert
policies an appropriate solution for the problem of
missing older adults with dementia? and (b) what
are the financial, personal, and emotional costs–
benefits of Silver Alert programs? These questions
lead us to note the limitations of available knowledge about the problem of missing adults and point
to the kinds of issues that should be addressed in
continued study along a variety of trajectories.
With respect to whether Silver Alert policies are
an appropriate solution to the problem of missing
older adults with dementia, there are two issues to
consider. Are missing older adults with dementia a
significant social problem (that warrant a social
policy intervention) and what do we know about
efforts to find missing adults? Neither of these issues can be easily answered. The category of elders
with dementia has been distinctly absent from
much of the research on missing persons. Although
some of the research on search and rescue involves
examinations of dementia-related cases (e.g., Rowe
& Glover, 2001; Perkins, Roberts, & Feeney,
2005), this research is limited and does not provide much evidence that missing adults, even those
with dementia, are considered to be a serious problem. In fact, in order to examine whether Silver
Alert programs are an appropriate solution to the
problem of dementia, it is critical to examine the
extent to which wandering itself poses problems to

those with the condition, those caring for people
with dementia (formal and informal caregivers),
and to society.
Furthermore, most information about older
adults with dementia who go missing has been
found in reference guides for search and rescue (see
e.g., Koester, 1999) or in mass media discourse
(e.g., Lai et al., 2003; Rowe & Bennett, 2003). We
are thus far unable to identify the emergence of the
problem in scholarly literature, suggesting the need
for continued studies of the problem of missing
adults in general and particularly those with dementia. The Nation’s Missing Children Organization, Inc., which was expanded in 2000 to serve
the needs of missing adults through the introduction of a program called the NMCA, may provide
a useful place of departure. The NMCA is a clearinghouse for missing adults in the United States.
The development of a comprehensive database on
missing adults has the potential to create a stronger foundation of knowledge for more in-depth
research on the problems unique to this group.
However, as useful as such a database will be, it
will be incomplete in that it cannot include information on those adults who go missing and are not
reported.
Second, we recommend a cost–benefit analysis
of Silver Alert programs. Despite the fact that
Silver Alerts can be enacted for individuals who go
missing in the community or in an institutional setting, they have been depicted as a resource for
those caring for older adults in the community.
Thus, they have been characterized as a societal
support mechanism to help elders stay in the community rather than having to move into an institution. Discourse of “aging in place” is often touted
as a method of empowerment for older adults with
dementia (Braun, 2008). With the number of
community-dwelling individuals who suffer from
dementia projected to increase as the population
continues to age, any support to help offset longterm care costs is viewed as beneficial. Silver Alert
programs appear to support individuals with
dementia’s ability to remain in the community longer by creating safeguards to remain in the family
home and for family members to keep an eye on
their older relatives.
However, efforts to secure older adults through
surveillance practices may exacerbate inequality
and succeed in further disempowering members of
the elder population who have dementia (see e.g.,
Kenner, 2008). Clarke (2006) notes that people

154

The Gerontologist

with impairments are rarely a focus of discussions
in popular press articles about dementia. Instead,
the framing is on the “disease” of dementia itself
(as powerful, fearsome, or causing bizarre behaviors), on the dominance of medical issues (as the
causes, treatments, and practitioners of the disease), or on the caregivers of individuals with the
disease (as those taking on the burden of problems
associated with dementia). In fact, individuals with
dementia have historically been viewed as not
needing or deserving “to be treated according to
common ethical precepts of human rights” (Clarke,
p. 272, italics in original). Some forms of surveillance and monitoring have been viewed as beneficial in helping care for frail older adults by
providing those with dementia with greater autonomy and caregivers with the ability to leave older
adults alone for extended periods of time (Kinney
& Kart, 2005).
Some “technology,” of which Silver Alerts are
an example, could be viewed as examples of ‘control creep’ in which a marginal or disempowered
segment of the population becomes increasingly
controlled under the auspices of receiving care
(Marx, 1988). Research suggests that the use of
AMBER Alert technology (the infrastructure of
which Silver Alerts relies upon) is more beneficial
when used sparingly (see Griffin et al., 2007),
and yet the financial cost of the program may encourage greater frequency of use. Perhaps of
greater concern, however, is the appropriateness
of the method of locating missing adults that uses
the same assumptions as those used in locating
missing children. Although there may be problems associated with the use of AMBER Alerts in
locating children (see Griffin & Miller, 2008),
this technology may be more appropriate for
children than older adults because children lack
the same legal rights as adults and their safety is
more important than their privacy. Most adults
with dementia live in the community either alone
or with a caregiver. If such an individual leaves
home and becomes missing, information about
that individual, often including her or his address, becomes publicly available, something
which may place this population at risk of victimization. For example, some states provide information about missing adults including the
missing individual’s (and sometimes their caregiver’s) address and other information as a press
releases that remains available to the general
public online and can be accessed months after
an event occurred.
Vol. 50, No.2, 2010

Furthermore, the balance between safety and
privacy is a much more complicated issue for older adults than children because, although recognized as a controversial issue (see Monmonier,
2002), adults have the right become missing by
choice. Many Silver Alert policies are activated
simply using an age threshold, and the enactment
of Silver Alert policies potentially sends a message
that some older adults’ desire to keep their whereabouts private may not be relevant. We argue that
this no-brainer policy intended to support the
safety of older adults should evoke greater discussions about what kind of civil liberties older adults
can and should posses and under what circumstances their safety should trump their right to
privacy. We suspect that for many, if not most,
state Silver Alert policies, especially those that
have more flexible guidelines for the criteria for
enactment of alerts, these kinds of social welfare
and civil liberties issues need to be thoughtfully
examined.
Despite the debate about the extent to which wandering is a problem for individuals with dementia,
for individuals who do wander off, the outcomes can
be grave. Efforts directed toward helping caregivers
avoid the crisis situation of having to find a missing
person are obviously important; however, it is
important to balance these efforts with assurances
that cognitively impaired elders retain their legal and
human rights. The social welfare issues nestled in
this policy are directed toward a relatively small segment of the aging population, yet to the extent that
these issues are generalized to the overall elder population, ageist notions of older adults as needy, expensive, and burdensome to society may be perpetuated
(Carr & Muschert, 2009).
There is much that can be learned from studies
of Silver Alerts programs. We applaud the wellmeaning efforts of many state legislatures across
the United States to create Silver Alert plans, yet
we also urge caution as these plans may not be a
quick fix to the little understood and complicated
problem of missing older adults with dementia.
We propose that more social science research that
examines the implications of Silver Alert programs
is necessary, taking into consideration the rights of
older adults and the needs of caregivers. Without
further examination, we are concerned that the
widespread, and what appears to be, unquestioned
institution of Silver Alert plans might do harm to
elders by removing the civil liberties of those who
are the subjects of such alerts and reinforce negative stereotypes of elders.

155

Acknowledgments
The authors wish to acknowledge the thoughtful commentary of Elizabeth Bozzelli and research assistance of Tirth Bhatta.

References
Alzheimer’s Association. (2007). Alzheimer’s disease prevalence rates rise
to more than 5 million in the United States. Retrieved September 26,
2008, from http://www.alz.org/news_and_events_rates_rise.asp
Alzheimer’s Association. (2008a). Alzheimer’s Association statement on
Silver Alert. Retrieved December 9, 2008, from http://www.alz.org/
news_and_events_14004.asp
Alzheimer’s Association. (2008b). Wandering. Retrieved September 26,
2008, from http://www.alz.org
Braun, P. B. (2008). Alzheimer’s Disease/Dementia—How social workers
help—Serving clients in a geriatric manager or private fiduciary role.
Helpstartshere.org. Retrieved December 9, 2008, from http://www.
helpstartshere.org/seniors_and_aging/alzheimers_disease/dementia/
how_social_workers_help/alzheimerandacutes_disease/dementia_-_
how_social_workers_help.html
Carr, D. C., & Muschert, G. W. (2009). Risk and ageing. In J. Powell, &
A. Wahidin (Eds.), Risk and social welfare. Hauppauge, NY: Nova
Sciences.
Clarke, J. N. (2006). The case of the missing person: Alzheimer’s disease in
mass print magazines 1991-2001. Health Communication, 19, 269–276.
Dewing, J. (2006). Wandering into the future: Reconceptualizing wandering ‘A natural and good thing.’ International Journal of Older People
Nursing, 1, 239–249.
Griffin, T., & Miller, M. K. (2008). Child abduction, AMBER Alert, and
crime control theater. Criminal Justice Review, 33, 150–176.
Griffin, T., Miller, M. K., Hoppe, J., Rebideaux, A., & Hammack, R.
(2007). A preliminary examination of AMBER Alert’s effects. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 18(4), 378–394.
Kenner, A. M. (2008). Securing the elderly body: Dementia, surveillance,
and the politics of “aging in place.”. Surveillance and Society, 5,
252–269.
Kim, E. K. (2008). Silver Alert finds wandering seniors. News-press.com.
Kinney, J. M., & Kart, C. S. (2005). From research intervention to social
practice: Logistic and challenges of using technology to assist family
with elders with dementia. Public Policy and Aging Report, 15(4),
24–27.
Kinney, J. M., Kart, C. S., Murdoch, L. D., & Conley, C. J. (2004). Striving to provide safety assistance for families of elders: The SAFE House
Project. Dementia: The International Journal of Social Research and
Practice, 3, 351–370.
Kinney, J. M., Kart, C. S., Murdoch, L. D., & Ziemba, T. F. (2003). Challenges in caregiving and creative solutions using technology to facilitate
caring for a relative with dementia. Ageing International, 28, 295–314.

Appendix
References used to collect data about state
Silver Alert policies
Colorado
National Association of State Units on Aging. (2008,
May). Silver Alert initiatives in the states: Protecting
seniors with cognitive impairments. Retrieved December 8,
2008, from www.nasua.org/pdf/Silver%20Alert%20
Initiatives%20in%20the%20states.pdf
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24–33.5–415.8 (2007).
Delaware
AARP Bulletin Today. (2008). New from Delaware. Retrieved December 8, 2008, from http://
bulletin.aarp.org/states/de/
76 Del. Laws, c. 379, § 1.

Koester, R. J. (1999). Lost Alzheimer’s disease search management: A law
enforcement guide to managing the initial response and investigation
of the missing Alzheimer’s disease subjectCharlottesville, VA: dbS Productions.
Lai, C., Jenny, K. Y., Chung, C. C., Wong, T., Faulkner, L. W., Ng, L.,
et al. (2003). Missing older persons with dementia—A Hong Kong
view. Hong Kong Journal of Social Work, 37(2), 239–245.
Marx, G. T. (1988). Undercover: Police surveillance in America. Berkeley,
CA: University of California Press.
Monmonier, M. S. (2002). Spying with maps: Surveillance technologies
and the future of privacy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Muschert, G. W., Young-Spillers, M., & Carr, D. C. (2006). ‘Smart’ policy
decisions to combat a social problem: The case of child abductions
2002-2003. Justice Policy Journal, 3, 1–32.
National Association of State Units on Aging. (2008). Silver Alert initiatives in the states: Protecting seniors with cognitive impairments. Retrieved December 8, 2008, from http://www.nasua.org/pdf/Silver%20
Alert%20Initiatives%20in%20the%20states.pdf
National Center for Missing Adults. (2007). Kristen’s Law. Retrieved June
17, 2008, from National Center for Missing Adults (NCMA) Web site
http://www.theyaremissed.org/ncma/content.php?webid=kristens_law
Perkins, D., Roberts, P., & Feeney, G. (2005). U.K. Missing Persons Behaviour Study. Retrieved September 30, 2008, from http://www.
searchresearch.org.uk/downloads/ukmpbs/FullReport.pdf
Petonito, G., Muschert, G., Manning, L., & Bhatta, L. (2009, April to
May). Putting the cart before the horse: The strange case of Silver
Alerts ‘solution’ to the missing adult ‘problem.’ Paper presented at the
Symbolic Interaction and Ethnographic Research Conference, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Pomerantz, J. M. (2006). Solving the problem of the wandering patient.
Drug Benefit Trends, 18, 556–557.
Robinson, L., Hutchings, D., Corner, L., Finch, T., Hughes, J., Brittain,
K., et al. (2007). Balancing rights and risks: Conflicting perspectives in
the management of wandering in dementia. Health, Risk and Society,
9, 389–406.
Rowe, M. A., & Bennett, V. (2003). A look at deaths occurring in persons
with dementia lost in the community. American Journal of Alzheimer’s
Disease and Other Dementias, 18, 343–348.
Rowe, M. A., & Glover, J. C. (2001). Antecedents, descriptions and consequences of wandering in cognitively-impaired adults and the Safe
Return (SR) program. American Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease and
Other Dementias, 16, 344–352.
Silverstein, N. M., Flaherty, G., & Salmons, T. (2002). Dementia and
wandering behavior: Concern for the lost elder. New York: Spring
Publishing.
Received March 25, 2009
Accepted May 13, 2009
Decision Editor: William J. McAuley, PhD

Florida
Kim, E. K. (2008). Silver Alert finds wandering
seniors. Retrieved December 8, 2008, from http://
news-press.com/article/20081208/NEWS01/­
812080349/1075
Georgia
National Association of State Units on Aging.
(2008, May). Silver Alert initiatives in the states:
Protecting seniors with cognitive impairments. Retrieved December 8, 2008, from www.nasua.org/pdf/
Silver%20Alert%20Initiatives%20in%20the%20
states.pdf
Illinois
20 Ill. Rev. Stat. § 2605/2605–375 (amended by
2007 HB 194).

156

The Gerontologist

Kentucky
Seniors Digest. (2008). The Kentucky Golden Alert
Law. Retrieved December 9, 2008, from http://www.
poststat.net/pwp008/pub.52/issue.890/article.3732/

from http://www.dps.nm.org/newsReleases/DPS/2007/
DPSnewsRelease_04.12.07%20Governor%20Signs%20
Bill%20to%20Expand%20the%20Missing%
20Persons%20Act.pdf

Louisiana
Silver Alert. (2008). Senate Bill No. 423.
Retrieved December 8, 2008, from http://www.
statesurge.com/bills/400016-sb423-louisiana

North Carolina
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143B–499.8 (2007).
Oklahoma
National Association of State Units on Aging. (May,
2008). Silver Alert initiatives in the states: Protecting
seniors with cognitive impairments. Retrieved
December 8, 2008, from www.nasua.org/pdf/Silver%20
Alert%20Initiatives%20in%20the%20states.pdf

Michigan
House, K. (2008). Mozelle Act would create alert
when senior citizen goes missing. The State New,
published July 17, 2008. Retrieved December 9,
2008, from http://www.statenews.com/index.php/
article/2008/07/mozelle_act_would_create_alert_
when_senior_citizen_goes_missing

Texas
Texas Department of Public Safety. (2008).
Governor’s Division of Emergency Management.
Silver Alert Request form. Retrieved December 8,
2008, from http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/dem/pages/
amberalertprogram.htm
Texas Association of Broadcasters. (2007, September).
Texas Implements Senior Silver Alert. Retrieved December 8, 2008, from http://www.enewsbuilder.net/
texasbroadcasters/e_article000913275.cfm?x=b11,0,w
National Association of State Units on Aging. (2008,
May). Silver Alert initiatives in the states: Protecting
seniors with cognitive impairments. Retrieved December
8, 2008, from www.nasua.org/pdf/Silver%20Alert%20
Initiatives%20in%20the%20states.pdf

Missouri
Sultan, A., & Ratcliffe, H. (2007). New Missouri
system notifies media, police of missing adults.
St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Retrieved December 8,
2008, from http://findmarygrobe.blogspot.
com/2007/03/new-missouri-system-notifies-media.
html
National Association of State Units on Aging.
(May, 2008). Silver Alert initiatives in the states:
Protecting seniors with cognitive impairments. Retrieved December 8, 2008, from www.nasua.org/pdf/
Silver%20Alert%20Initiatives%20in%20the%20
states.pdf
Missouri State Highway Patrol. (2008). About the
endangered person advisory: Missouri endangered
person advisory plan. Retrieved December 8, 2008,
from http://www.mshp.dps.missouri.gov/MSHPWeb/
PatrolDivisions/DDCC/EndangeredPersonAdvisory/
aboutEndangeredPersonAdvisory.html

Virginia
National Association of State Units on Aging. (2008,
May). Silver Alert initiatives in the states: Protecting
seniors with cognitive impairments. Retrieved
December 8, 2008, from www.nasua.org/pdf/Silver%20
Alert%20Initiatives%20in%20the%20states.pdf
Va. Code § 52–34.5.
Virginia Senior Alert System. (2008). Background,
and Governing Legislation. Retrieved December 8,
2008, from http://www.vasenioralert.com/

Montana
Montana Department of Justice Law Enforcement. (2008). Missing and Endangered Person
Advisory (MEPA). Retrieved December 9, 2008,
from http://www.doj.mt.gov/enforcement/missingpersons/mepa.asp
New Mexico
Missing Person’s Information Act. (2007). Senate Bill
912. Retrieved December 8, 2008, from http://legis.state.
nm.us/Sessions/07%20Regular/bills/senate/SB0912.html
State of New Mexico Office of the Governor. (2007).
Governor Richardson Signs Bill to Expand the Missing
Persons Information Act. Retrieved December 8, 2008,

Vol. 50, No.2, 2010

South Dakota
Endangered Persons Advisory. (2008). You can help
find missing persons in South Dakota. Retrieved
December 9, 2008, from http://www.state.sd.us/epa/
EndangeredPersons.html
Utah
Utah Department of Public Safety. (2008). View
active AMBER Alerts or Endangered Person Advisory.
Retrieved December 9, 2008, from http://publicsafety.
utah.gov/bci/MPCRachael.html

157

