极速赛车168最新开奖号码 Comments on: Safeguarding adults enquiries: do you need consent?

极速赛车168最新开奖号码 By: Here we go again

Here we go again — Wed, 14 Feb 2024 10:22:26 +0000

In reply to Anonymous 2. What also needs to be considered, is the long-term, mental impact of consequences, of not safeguarding the affected person. I've never known so much red tape in my life. Our laws need to be way stricter again. Some of my friends are vulnerable, and I constantly witness failed outcome after failed outcome, where the person needing the safeguarding, just ends up worse, because the stalker can still get away with it lightly.

极速赛车168最新开奖号码 By: Here we go again

Here we go again — Wed, 14 Feb 2024 09:58:29 +0000

Care providers sometimes care a lot more about their own reputation [not including care home company’s or hospital’s]. They don’t even admit to any of their residents stalking people, so there’s another barrier. I’m talking about, giving example of, something that is happening right now. What if there are two clients/service users, who live in the same building, but one of them needs safeguarding from the resident that is constantly stalking him or her? Where do you start? And where does it end?

极速赛车168最新开奖号码 By: Clement Guerin

Clement Guerin — Tue, 30 Jan 2024 08:41:31 +0000

As well as the implicit lack of consent required in s42 Care Act, this needs to be understood alongside the explicit lack of requiring consent set out in in s11(2)(b) Care Act where there is a concern about abuse or neglect. Many situations which trigger the duty for an adult safeguarding enquiry will also trigger a duty for a s9 Care Act assessment (or reassessment) which has to go ahead even if the person refuses that assessment and has the mental capacity to decide to refuse. Unfortunately, the statutory guidance doesn’t mention this in Chapter 14, the section on adult safeguarding, so it can get missed, but paragraph 6.20 makes it clear. The link between the assessment duty and the adult safeguarding enquiry duty is reinforced by paragraph 14.92 of the guidance. One of the objectives of an adult safeguarding enquiry is to assess the needs of the adult for protection, support and redress. It would seem that a s9 Care Act assessment could be a good way of achieving that objective.

There are good points made in other comments about informing the person about the enquiry, working in partnership with them, and an enquiry coming to an end if that is what the person wants, but those are different from there being a non-negotiable statutory duty to commence on an adult safeguarding enquiry even if the adult is not in agreement with that happening.

The human rights issue is more complex. I think the relevant right being referred to is Article 8. That is not an absolute right. Article 8(2) allows a public authority to interfere with the right to privacy if it is done in accordance with law (which s42 and s9 + s11(2)(b) give a gateway to meeting) and it is necessary for one or more of the purposes listed in Article 8(2). I think it is foreseeable that some, perhaps many, adult safeguarding concerns might meet that necessity test. But if we find ourselves in those circumstances, we’d want to have done all we can to meet, and evidence we have met, public law principles. But I don’t think Article 8 creates an absolute barrier if the person is not in agreement with there being an adult safeguarding enquiry.

极速赛车168最新开奖号码 By: Anonymous 2

Anonymous 2 — Mon, 29 Jan 2024 07:22:51 +0000

Whilst I think I understood what is meant by the article , I do not necessarily agree that only involvement should be considered.
It misses out on of the principles of safeguarding ’empowerment, prevention, protection, proportionality, partnerships and accountability’, but more importantly due regard to making safeguarding personal.
The problem I have with the word involvement only being considered is that, for example, if I am involved in a ‘dinner party’ that wording removes me as the ‘party host’ (I am not calling the shots, I am just participating) , whilst with Safeguarding the Adult should always be considered the ‘host’ and we should empower people’s rights to decision-making regardless of any LAs duties (proportionality).
When someone who is capacitated clearly requests for an enquiry to be ceased despite of others’ concerns, the question here is and has to be more than just the Adult’s involvement, in my view there is surely an element of consent by the person too.
There is a fine balance between LA duties, people’s wishes and human rights which must be regarded.

极速赛车168最新开奖号码 By: Jam

Jam — Fri, 26 Jan 2024 18:50:55 +0000

Great read and very relevant. I just completed two day ‘role of the enquiry officer training and work in an Adult Learning Disability and Autism team. I will share this with my team.

极速赛车168最新开奖号码 By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 26 Jan 2024 18:21:31 +0000

Very interesting parallels between ‘Consent’ and ‘Involvement’ in line with Making Safeguarding Personal.

Thank you James Codling, very interesting reflective read.

极速赛车168最新开奖号码 By: Pat

Pat — Wed, 24 Jan 2024 16:40:56 +0000

In reply to C Barnabas. Thank you James for reminding us that in from the onset of safeguarding inquiries, service user involvement and participation is essential.

极速赛车168最新开奖号码 By: C Barnabas

C Barnabas — Tue, 23 Jan 2024 16:28:43 +0000

This article is a helpful reminder about legal obligations under Section 42. However, it feels that not enough emphasis was made to remember that all three conditions of
Section 42 of the Care Act 2014 need to be checked, the first of which is: Does the adult in question have needs for care and support? The Local Authority must have reasonable cause to suspect that the adult has such needs. Only if this condition is met, then (b) and (c) apply. (c) also refers to the needs for care and support: It is only where the adult as a result of the needs for care and support is unable to protect themselves, that the obligation to investigate kicks in.

It is important to check that all three conditions of Section 42 are met. That is why I think we need to be careful to differentiate and not approach the subject of Safeguarding with a ‘one size fits all’ approach. Consent to an investigation still needs to be mentioned during training, especially in the Third Sector where charities or religious communities work with people who do NOT have any needs for care and support. In my experience, when someone hears the word “abuse”, people can immediately jump on the safeguarding wagon, without checking whether the person in question meets the criteria as set out in Section 42. It is, of course, a completely different matter where an adult has needs for care and support under the Care Act.