Another elderly resident in an Australian aged care home has been subjected to police force, raising renewed concerns about how authorities respond to people living with dementia and complex behaviours. In scenes disturbingly similar to the fatal 2023 Taser incident involving 95-year-old Clare Nowland, NSW Police have confirmed officers used capsicum spray on an 87-year-old man inside a Sydney residential facility on Wednesday night.
Officers from Camden police area command were called to the home just after 8pm following reports the resident was “armed with a metal ornament” and had threatened to harm staff, other residents and himself. Staff had reportedly locked themselves in a room after the man began swinging the object.
When police arrived, they found the man in the foyer, still holding the ornament. He refused to put it down, and officers deployed pepper spray before restraining him. NSW Ambulance later transported the man to Campbelltown Hospital. Police said there were “nil injuries”.
Assistant Commissioner Brett McFadden said the man was experiencing “an altered state of consciousness” and was acting violently due to dementia. He stressed that the behaviour did not reflect the man’s true character and said his family did not want the story made public.
“It’s very challenging circumstances,” McFadden said. “Such is the insidious nature of dementia and the challenges it presents.”
But the explanation has done little to quell growing anger about yet another police confrontation with a vulnerable, cognitively impaired older person. While police insist the man was a risk, advocates and aged care observers argue that the continued use of police force inside nursing homes highlights a system still failing to prepare for predictable behavioural crises.
A painful reminder of Clare Nowland
The incident immediately drew comparisons to the death of Clare Nowland, who died after being Tasered by NSW Police in May 2023 at the Yallambee Lodge aged care home in Cooma. Nowland, who also lived with dementia, was holding a steak knife and moving slowly with the aid of a walking frame when she was electrocuted. The officer, Kristian White, was later found guilty of manslaughter.
In that case, police faced intense criticism for their delayed and incomplete communication with the public. Early media releases omitted the fact that a Taser had been used at all. Critics say the lack of transparency in the current case is just as concerning, with police again attempting to keep the location and details vague, citing family wishes.
The similarities between the two incidents raise uncomfortable questions: Why is the default response to behavioural escalation in dementia so often a police intervention? And why do these interventions repeatedly end with force used on the very people aged care facilities are supposed to protect?
A systemic failure, not an isolated event
Behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia are common and well-documented. Escalations like aggression or confusion are often a sign of unmet needs, overstimulation, pain, fear or severe distress. Aged care providers and clinicians have long warned that facilities without adequate staff numbers, training and clinical oversight are more likely to rely on crisis interventions.
What is emerging is a troubling pattern in which police enter aged care environments without specialist dementia training, equipped primarily with tools designed for criminal enforcement rather than clinical de-escalation.
Even police acknowledge the difficulty. McFadden said on Thursday that officers do not have “the luxury of what could have been done” and insisted that capsicum spray was deployed to prevent potential harm. But this framing ignores the broader issue: the lack of alternative pathways that do not involve weaponised force, regardless of age or capacity.
Should police be responding at all?
Aged care unions, advocates and dementia specialists have repeatedly argued for specialised behavioural response teams, on-site clinical expertise and comprehensive dementia training for all staff. Without these, situations escalate unnecessarily and the only available emergency response becomes police intervention.
But critics say the public has heard these promises before. After the Clare Nowland incident, NSW Police pledged greater transparency and review processes. The aged care sector called for better dementia training and behavioural support. Yet nearly three years later, another resident in cognitive distress has ended up on the receiving end of police force.
This newest case again raises the question: Are we willing to accept pepper spraying an 87-year-old man with dementia as an appropriate “resolution”? Or does the system need a fundamental rethink of how it responds to vulnerability, distress and cognitive decline?
Another review, but little faith
Camden police area command will now conduct a review of the incident. But for many in the aged care community, confidence in internal reviews is low. After all, the Clare Nowland review only gained full public scrutiny after significant pressure, and the first version of events released to the media was incomplete.
McFadden acknowledged the public interest, noting that supporting people with dementia in aged care is a “challenge for the whole community”. Few would disagree. But the public is justified in asking why, after repeated tragedies and promised reforms, frail older people are still being met with weapons instead of care.
Until aged care facilities are properly staffed, adequately trained and supported by specialist dementia services, and until police are equipped with non-weaponised tools for dealing with cognitive impairment, incidents like this will continue. And so will the outrage.
The issue is more of staff training. Many staff who have very basic training try to manage people with Dementia, and inflame the situation. Dementia care is specialised & should be handled in that way.
The trouble is training now days is conducted on a “one cap fits all” process.
There are also many due to language difficulties, being both the resident & the worker, do not have the verbal skills, along with the appropriate training to diffuse a situation leading to increased frustration, paranoia increasing that leads to inappropriate intervention by Police. (This is also seen in Mental Health situations as well).
We need level headed people to tackle this situation, it’s one that affects many Nursing Homes especially linguistically diverse homes.
Common sense tells us that if you have a home full of Chinese, Italian, Greek speaking people that you put only English speaking staff in there.
All homes have mixtures of residents with non-English backgrounds & it is known that these people often revert back to their native tongue. Staff need to be employed to cater for these situations, along with at least basic Dementia Training – I believe they need more than that.
There is also the situation, that I have heard of that also relates to Hospital Care – that of Migrant staff dealing with people from trauma backgrounds & because the resident/patient is not comfortable with that person or is reactive to that persons language base or colour of their skin, the staff member labels them as racist, this is another area that inflames care giving.
We need to stop & look at staff ratios that they have an equal mix of ethnic backgrounds to cater to the population at large.
After working in the industry for many years, from an AIN to a GM, I was once a team leader in a Memory Support unit. Although the residents have dementia, they can still pose safety risks to people around them and themselves, so I don’t see that the police officer had much choice. maybe some more training would Help the police, but I find it hard to criticise them for protecting the people around them.
The phrase “meeting unmet needs” sounds straightforward, but needs can be physical, emotional, or spiritual. Determining which specific need is unmet can be challenging. Sometimes, multiple needs are involved, and it’s important to consider whether those needs can be addressed promptly and accessibly—or if it’s even possible to meet them at all. Therefore, we shouldn’t rely on that assumption alone.
When observing the dementia process, it’s clear that each person’s experience is unique. Only by carefully watching behaviors can we identify when something is wrong and then explore whether it’s due to dementia itself or another condition layered on top. Delirium, for example, is often mistaken for dementia or a worsening of dementia, but it is actually a treatable condition once the cause is found—often an infection like a respiratory or urinary tract infection. Medication interactions can also trigger delirium.
While staff in dementia units are expected to have specialized training, it’s unrealistic to expect them to manage every situation perfectly—no one can. Even with extensive experience in psychiatric and general nursing, and as a member of Dementia Behaviour Management Assessment Services (DBMAS), there were situations that exceeded our capacity and required police intervention.
Nursing home staff are not police or security officers, yet there’s a public expectation for them to fill those roles. It’s often accepted that staff may be assaulted or injured, with the rationale that they chose this line of work and should understand the risks. Even in psychiatric settings without security personnel, we had to undergo professional assault response training, though our primary role was nursing—not acting as “bouncers.”
Before making judgments or assigning blame, it’s important to consider what measures are realistic and appropriate. In some cases, such as the one mentioned, it’s likely the individual was experiencing delirium due to an infection, but without more information, we can only speculate based on headlines