Carers are seen as legitimate stakeholders in wider policy processes and increasingly as 'co-producers' and key providers of care. Mental health carers, however, especially those caring for relatives subject to compulsory care and treatment, often feel overlooked and marginalised, caring in complex circumstances with little or no professional support. The Mental Health (Care & Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 (MHCT Act) implemented in 2005 aspired to change this for the better. This article focuses specifically on findings from seven focus groups and 10 individual interviews with 33 carers from three Health Board areas and the State Hospital in Scotland. Interviews were conducted at two stages during 2007 and 2008 as part of a wider study. Participating carers were supporting relatives who were under different compulsory measures and so had experience of new procedures under the MHCT Act. The data were gathered as part of a cohort study exploring service users', carers' and professionals' early experiences of the Act's implementation. A topic guide was used to explore the impact of compulsion on carers; the 'Named Person' role; Mental Health Tribunals; the principles underpinning the MHCT Act; and suggestions for improving the law. The study found that new provisions, in particular the Named Person role and Mental Health Tribunals, had resulted in positive change. However, many carers still felt isolated and unsupported. They remained critical of the lack of consultation and involvement at both individual and collective levels. Few were aware of their right to a carer's assessment and many were sceptical that this would make any difference. Acknowledging the study's limitations, we discuss the implications for practice in light of broader policy agendas of personalisation, recovery, recognition for carers and promotion of more community-based mental health services.

This article presents findings from a focused scoping review of the published literature on self-directed support (SDS), the term adopted by the Scottish Government to refer to its policy to improve social care outcomes and choices for people using publicly funded services and to distinguish it from personalisation, the term more commonly used in England, and from consumer-directed-care and cash for counselling. The review was undertaken to inform an evaluation of the early adopters of SDS, funded by the Scottish Government 2009-2011, and was updated with later literature. It focused on the evidence base available to inform the Test Sites' (pilot local authorities) efforts to reduce bureaucracy or 'red tape' for people choosing their own social care and support; the available evidence about leadership and training to support these changes and about the use of specific transitional funding to ease the process of implementation. The findings of the literature review around these three themes are presented and discussed. The article concludes with a discussion of the potential for such focused literature reviews to inform policy-makers, researchers, and social work practitioners across Europe of the options available when seeking to combine rapid yet rigorous approaches to evidence.

In current debates about citizenship, three approaches to social rights can be detected. Three models of access to social rights mirror these accounts. The institutionalised rights model, based on the post-war welfare state, stresses education and information. The market efficiency model, stressing the need for consumer information, stems from contemporary neo-liberal, consumerist approaches to welfare provision. The radical model challenges the assumption of a level playing field for all citizens. As the state's role in housing has been transformed and governments have stressed the market efficiency model, housing advice services have expanded in both state and voluntary sectors. The objectives and work of these services is examined and shown as providing a close fit with the institutionalised rights model in the local authority sector, while in the voluntary sector the radical rights model dominates. In addition, the campaigning work of voluntary organisations is shown to promote a radical view of citizenship rights.

Purpose -This paper aims to explore the possible connections between self-directed support and adult support and protection, both of which are important policy developments in Scotland.Design/methodology/approach -The authors draw on findings from the national evaluation of the test sites or pilots of self-directed support in Scotland and interviews at two time points with adult protection leads in the test sites. These interview data are set in the context of Scottish developments in adult support and protection. Findings -Self-directed support and adult protection had not been joined up initially. In the three Scottish test sites those responsible for adult safeguarding had not been engaged with the changes. They were unclear about the new systems and were concerned about the implications of reduced monitoring of risks. Shared training between those implementing self-directed support and those carrying out adult protection work was viewed as a way of bridging these different areas of practice through enhancing mutual understanding and communication. Originality/value -Policy and legislation have used the word support to provide reassurance of social protection for adults in need of care services. This paper provides new opportunities to consider the ways in which early enthusiasm for self-directed support in Scotland may have neglected the support inherent to support and protection and the ways in which some adult support and protection stakeholders seemed to be acting as ''bystanders'' rather than influencing new systems of self-directed support.

No abstract