Search

Individualized funding of disability support services has implications for people's choices about when to share their home. This paper examines how people with disabilities made choices about who to live with and the factors influencing these choices. This paper discusses data from interviews with 30 people with mostly intellectual disabilities using individualized support services, 21 interviews with family members, four interviews with service managers, and a focus group with five support workers. The data come from a large evaluation of individualized housing support programs in New South Wales, Australia. Only some people had the opportunity to choose whether to share and with whom. Their choices were constrained by the range of housing options and their limited experience of them, even when they had support to make choices about shared housing or living alone. In some cases, the choices reflected a conceptualization of people with disabilities as different to other citizens in their rights and expectations about their social arrangements. The results have implications for information sharing, housing stock, and the need to challenge the positioning of people with disabilities relative to other people regarding choices about where and with whom to live. Many people preferred not to live alone, so as to improve their economic and social circumstances, and their choice and control. The choices about shared housing that many people and their supporters made were constrained by their limited experience of housing options or their familiarity with the range of choices made by other people with disabilities. Being able to draw on the material, social, and information resources of family made a big difference to their housing choices. It raises questions for policy implementation about whether individualized support may lock some people into shared housing arrangements by failing to include housing costs in the individual package. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To evaluate the usability and acceptability of the Mental Capacity Assessment Support Toolkit (MCAST) in healthcare settings and whether its use was associated with increased legal compliance and assessor confidence. A mixed methods convergence triangulation model was used. Multidisciplinary professionals used the MCAST during mental capacity assessments for UK hospital patients with diagnoses of stroke or acute or chronic cognitive impairment. Changes in legal compliance were investigated by comparing scores on case note audits before and after implementation of the MCAST. Changes in assessor confidence and professionals' perceptions of the MCAST's usability and acceptability were explored using surveys. Patients' and family members' views on acceptability were determined using semi-structured interviews. Data were integrated using triangulation. Twenty-one professionals, 17 patients and two family members participated. Use of the MCAST was associated with significant increases in legal compliance and assessor confidence. Most professionals found the MCAST easy to use and beneficial to their practice and patients. Patients and family members found the MCAST materials acceptable. The MCAST is the first toolkit to support the needs of individuals with communication disabilities during mental capacity assessments. It enables assessors to deliver high quality, legally compliant and confident practice. Mental capacity assessment practice needs to be improved to maximise patient autonomy, safety and well-being. The MCAST is a paper-based toolkit designed to facilitate and improve mental capacity practice in England and Wales. This study suggests the MCAST would be easy and acceptable to use in healthcare settings and could lead to improvements in assessment quality and assessor confidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]