Making adult safeguarding personal

Abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to ascertain what efforts Adult Safeguarding Leads (ASLs), generic advocates, and Independent Mental Capacity Advocates are making to involve service users in decisions about protective measures, and to investigate whether the Adult Safeguarding service is delivering outcomes, which are valued by its users. Design/methodology/approach -Semi-structured interviews with a sample of key stakeholders. Findings -ASLs are making efforts to involve service users in the complex and demanding process of safeguarding. These efforts, however, are shaped by their understandings of the difference between "residential" and "community" settings.Research limitations/implications -The study is based in a single County Council, albeit in a large county, and involves a limited number of service users. Practical implications -Clarification is needed of what it may mean to adopt a person-centred approach to adult safeguarding, and the responsibilities of ASLs when individuals with capacity to make decisions about this aspect of their lives are unwilling to engage with the safeguarding process. Originality/value -The findings improve the understanding of how ASLs understand their responsibilities towards the users of their services and endeavour to involve them in the adult safeguarding process. Based on this understanding, those with responsibility for managing Adult Safeguarding services should be better able to support improvements in professional practice.

10,000 Voices: service users’ experiences of adult safeguarding

“…The survey also highlighted the importance of professionals’ understanding of the service user or carer’s desired outcomes. Redley et al (2015), in their review of MSP, identified differing views of what constitutes a “good outcome” among Adult Safeguarding Leads (ASL) and between ASL and service users. Butler and Manthorpe (2016) and Timson et al (2015), found that early discussions around desired outcomes were valued by both service users and staff.…”

“…Service users and professionals may hold differing perspectives of what constitutes a positive outcome (Hopkinson et al, 2015;Redley et al 2015). Moreover, changing power dynamics have been identified with social workers adopting advocacy roles for adults at risk (Hopkinson, et al, 2015).…”

“…In this approach, the complexity of adult safeguarding processes to deliver outcomes which are valued by service users has been identified. Service users and professionals may hold differing perspectives of what constitutes a positive outcome (Hopkinson et al , 2015; Redley et al , 2015). Moreover, changing power dynamics have been identified with social workers adopting advocacy roles for adults at risk (Hopkinson et al , 2015).…”

“…The role played by stress and trauma in an individual's ability to process information was highlighted. The survey has demonstrated the importance of providing information in a selection of formats to allow the service user and carer time for reflection and future consideration.The survey also highlighted the importance of professionals' understanding of the service user or carer's desired outcomes Redley et al (2015),. in their review of MSP, identified differing views of what constitutes a 'good outcome' among Adult Safeguarding Leads (ASL) and between ASL and service users.…”

Making Safeguarding Personal: progress of English local authorities

“…Similarly, there has been very little research on the impact on social workers' effectiveness; see Needham (2015) for an example which found there was a need for changes to training and recording systems to embed MSP in a local authority. Redley et al (2015), again in a small study, investigated how safeguarding leads engaged service users in decision making through an MSP approach and found that the leads were making efforts to involve service users but there was still some way to go in embedding it.…”