In the eighties, elder abuse cases became of paramount concern to policy makers and those working in fields serving older adults. Very little research, however, has examined how the justice system handles cases of elder abuse. In this paper, the results of a study assessing how various professionals recommended punishing those who harm elderly persons are presented. A survey asking respondents to justify why cases of elder abuse should be handled the way they believe they are handled was completed by police chiefs, nursing home professionals, and students. Focusing on traditional punishment justifications including general deterrence, specific deterrence, rehabilitation, retribution, incapacitation, and victim satisfaction, results indicate that police chiefs and students hold more punitive attitudes while nursing home professionals show more rehabilitative ideals. Implications suggest that differences in punishment justifications can be overcome in the collaborative response to elder abuse. (Contains 5 tables.)