As our population is aging, the global prevalence of dementia is rising. Recent extensive reviews of the dementia literature highlight a clear need for additional qualitative research to address the experiences of people with dementia and their carers. To date, the vast majority of published dementia research is quantitative in nature and, perhaps not surprisingly, attracts the bulk of government funding. In contrast, qualitative dementia research is poorly resourced and less frequently published. Although a myriad of factors are responsible for this dichotomy, we propose that inadequate funding represents the “elephant in the room” of dementia research. In this article, we describe and emphasize the need for qualitative dementia research, highlight existing barriers, and outline potential solutions. Examples of barriers are provided and theoretical underpinnings are proposed.

Legal processes, particularly those relating to criminal justice, have frequently been criticized for their inability to accommodate the experiences of racialized women. Recognizing categories of difference is difficult for processes that are framed within an ideology that emphasizes objectivity and universalism. The Australian Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody (RCIADIC) was a quasi-legal entity that investigated 99 Indigenous deaths in custody, as well as the underlying social, cultural and legal issues that may have had a bearing on those deaths. The RCIADIC, like many other legal processes, appears to have been unable to take an intersectional race and gender approach in its analysis. This article uses the RCIADIC inquiry to identify, describe and critically analyse the ways in which the dominant liberal ideology can, at times, operate to exclude racialized women. The reasons identified are based on the opinions and information collected from 48 interviews of people who either worked for the RCIADIC or were in some other way associated with the RCIADIC. The critical analysis presented in this article provides insights into how legal processes remain patriarchal in focus even when embarking on an inquiry about race.

Mainstream sentencing courts do little to change the behavior of partner violence offenders, let alone members of more socially marginal groups. Indigenous offenders face a court system that has little relevance to the complexity of their relations and lived experiences. Assisted by respected Elders and Community Representatives, Australian Indigenous sentencing courts seek to create a more meaningful sentencing process that has a deeper impact on Indigenous offenders’ attitudes and, ultimately, their behavior. Drawing from interviews with 30 Indigenous offenders, we explore the ways in which the courts can motivate Indigenous partner violence offenders on pathways to desistence.