Search

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to set out and discuss findings from a developmental study, commissioned by the English Department of Health and the charity, Comic Relief, which was commissioned to clarify definitional issues and recommend ways of operationalising key concepts for a prospective survey of abuse, neglect and loss of dignity in the care of older people in residential care in the United Kingdom (UK). Design/methodology/approach – As well as drawing upon their experience and expertise, the authors conducted a review of the literature, held consultation events with a range of stakeholders and undertook in-depth interviews with international academics and care home residents. Findings – Existing definitions and descriptions vary widely in form and content, are commonly subjective and imprecise and frequently make reference to abstract concepts which themselves need defining. Many of the concepts are also inherently evaluative, unspecific and open to interpretation. The study considered how, in this context, practical research definitions that are clear, unambiguous and widely acceptable to a range of stakeholders could be developed. Research limitations/implications – The study took a UK focus and the review of literature was confined to the English language. Further research might usefully extend discussion about definitions cross-culturally. The interview samples were small and should not be considered to be representative. Originality/value – The paper identifies key issues in defining the perpetrator. It focuses on the concepts of trust and intentionality, the responsibilities of the care home and multiple perpetrators and makes practical proposals for operationalising the "perpetrator" in research. Recommendations from the study were positively received and have directly informed the Government-funded research programme in England. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose -- Little is known about the implications of employing agency staff on safeguarding or the reasons why employers recruit staff from agencies who specialise in supplying staff to the sector or why social care staff work for such agencies. This paper aims to present findings from a study of agency workers in social care services in England. Design/methodology/approach -- Drawing on a review of the literature and policy documents, the study involved a survey of local authorities and interviews were conducted with 93 agency workers and other stakeholders. The interviews took place in three selected localities and data were analysed thematically. The survey investigated local authorities' use of agency workers, enquiring about reasons for this means of employment and any trends. The survey findings were contextualised by national data from England. Findings -- Analysis of interview and survey data revealed a variety of reasons for the employment of agency staff. In relation to safeguarding, agency workers filled staffing gaps and met needs for social care services or assessment; however , their abilities to offer continuity of care and sometimes to work within existing systems were compromised. Some employers did not provide agency workers with access to professional development opportunities or supervision. Practical implications -- The findings are used to develop recommendations for safeguarding practice at local level. Originality/value -- There is a temptation to depict agency workers as presenting safeguarding risks: this paper argues that a more rounded picture should be offered and a systems approach adopted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose -- The purpose of this paper is to summarise findings of a review of service user and carer involvement in safeguarding and recommendations for good practice. Design/methodology/approach -- The study involved a review of selected literature and a consultation exercise with experts in the field of adult safeguarding and telephone interviews with 13 Adult Safeguarding Leads across England and Wales. Findings -- Service users value rights, independence, choice and support. Adult Safeguarding policy sets out an expectation of service user involvement in the process and expects agencies to balance rights to self-determination with properly managed risk. In practice, agencies tend to be risk-averse and service users often do not feel involved in their safeguarding processes. Processes such as collaborative risk enablement, training and capacity building, working with BME groups and evaluation of involvement help. Good practice examples of involvement in Safeguarding Boards or local forums, developing new methods of user feedback and community involvement were found. Recommendations include more involvement of service users in research, more effective forms of involvement of groups who may be more excluded, shared responsibility for risk, and more training in rights legislation. Practical implications -- The paper offers recommendations for good practice in improving involvement in adult safeguarding, which is a requirement and an essential component of delivering good services to vulnerable adults. Originality/value -- Service user involvement in health and social care is now widespread, but there is little knowledge of how to involve the most vulnerable service users who are in need of protection, or how to balance risk and empowerment. This paper addresses the dilemmas facing Adult Protection staff, summarises the experience of practitioners based on the first decade of adult safeguarding work and sets out guidance for improving practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose -- This paper seeks to consider the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and, in particular, the extent to which the functions of supervisory bodies can, or should be, performed as part of wider "safeguarding" responsibilities. Design/methodology/approach -- The paper reports the views of practitioners, given in response to comments made by the Care Quality Commission. Findings -- Some practitioners believe that DoLS and safeguarding functions should be consolidated, and some, that they should remain discrete; most, however, accept that the two functions should work closely together, and also that an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act is important for each; there is a suspicion that DoLS-activity is greatest where the two functions are kept discrete (and, it is assumed, DoLS practitioners therefore have more to prove); there is also concern about financing, particularly within discrete DoLS services, and, furthermore, some suspicion about the whole business of "safeguarding"; the Neary case continues to cast a long shadow. Originality/value -- This is believed to be the first time practitioners' views have been sought or at least published on this question. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]