Mental health law under review: messages from English safeguarding adults reviews

Manthorpe, Jill; Martineau, Stephen

doi:10.1108/jap-10-2018-0020

Cited by 2 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recommendations fall into four categories (Braye et al, 2015a), neglecting the legal, policy and financial context within which adult safeguarding is situated (Manthorpe and Martineau, 2019;Preston-Shoot et al, 2020). Legal rules and social policy determine the shape of eligibility for care and support, social housing and welfare benefits, for example, and provide the framework for pathways into adult safeguarding.…”

Section: Themes Within Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Overall, how legal rules and practitioner values complicate this feature of practice remains an under-developed theme (Manthorpe and Martineau, 2019).…”

Section: Cross-case Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other thematic reviews have also raised concerns about advocacy provision (Manthorpe and Martineau, 2019;Preston-Shoot et al, 2020).…”

Section: Cross-case Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other SAR research has also identified poor joint working and coordination (Manthorpe and Martineau, 2019;Preston-Shoot et al, 2020). One review explicitly attributed concerns about multi-agency working to the absence of a protocol that would provide a framework within which practitioners and services would work (247).…”

Section: Domain B: the Professional Team Around The Adultmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Legislation can be difficult to understand and implement (Braye and Preston-Shoot, 2016). The interface between different statutes can be challenging to unravel (Manthorpe and Martineau, 2019). However, there may also be insufficient "law talk" between practitioners and supervisors and within and between services (Braye and Preston-Shoot, 2020).…”

Section: Domain B: the Professional Team Around The Adultmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

On (not) learning from self-neglect safeguarding adult reviews

Preston‐Shoot

2021

JAP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to update the core data set of self-neglect safeguarding adult reviews (SARs) and accompanying thematic analysis. It also explores whether lessons are being learned from the findings and recommendations of an increasing number of reviews on self-neglect cases. Design/methodology/approach Further published reviews are added to the core data set, mainly drawn from the websites of safeguarding adults boards (SABs). Thematic analysis is updated using the domains used previously. The domains and the thematic analysis are grounded in the evidence-based model of good practice, reported in this journal previously. Findings Familiar findings emerge from the thematic analysis and reinforce the evidence-base of good practice with individuals who self-neglect and for policies and procedures with which to support those practitioners working with such cases. Multiple exclusion homelessness and alcohol misuse are prominent. Some SABs are having to return to further cases of self-neglect to review, inviting scrutiny of what is (not) being learned from earlier findings and recommendations. Research limitations/implications The national database of reviews commissioned by SABs remains incomplete. The Care Act 2014 does not require publication of reports but only a summary of findings and recommendations in SAB annual reports. National Health Service Digital annual data sets do not enable the identification of reviews by types of abuse and neglect. However, the first national analysis of SARs has found self-neglect to be the most prominent type of abuse and/or neglect reviewed. Drawing together the findings builds on what is known about the components of effective practice, and effective policy and organisational arrangements for practice. Practical implications Answering the question “why” remains a significant challenge for SARs. The findings confirm the relevance of the evidence-base for effective practice but SARs are limited in their analysis of what enables and what obstructs the components of best practice. Greater explicit use of research and other published SARs might assist with answering the “why” question. Greater scrutiny is needed of the impact of the national legal, policy and financial context within which adult safeguarding is situated. Originality/value The paper extends the thematic analysis of available reviews that focus on study with adults who self-neglect, further reinforcing the evidence base for practice. Propositions are explored, concerned with whether learning is being maximised from the process of case review.

show abstract

Section: Themes Within Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Overall, how legal rules and practitioner values complicate this feature of practice remains an under-developed theme (Manthorpe and Martineau, 2019).…”

Section: Cross-case Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other thematic reviews have also raised concerns about advocacy provision (Manthorpe and Martineau, 2019;Preston-Shoot et al, 2020).…”

Section: Cross-case Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Domain B: the Professional Team Around The Adultmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Domain B: the Professional Team Around The Adultmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

On (not) learning from self-neglect safeguarding adult reviews

Preston‐Shoot

2021

JAP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The role of the Mental Health Act 1983 in safeguarding adults at risk of abuse and neglect: a thematic analysis of safeguarding adults reviews

Foss

2023

JAP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to consider the role of the Mental Health Act (MHA) 1983 in safeguarding adults at risk of abuse and neglect. The author has undertaken a thematic review of Safeguarding Adults Reviews (SARs) commissioned in England and Adult Practice Reviews (APRs) commissioned in Wales where the MHA 1983 was a central aspect to the review. Design/methodology/approach Reviews were included based on specific determinants, following analysis of SARs, APRs and executive summaries. This should not affect the credibility of the research, as themes were identified in conjunction with analysis of literature regarding use of the MHA in the context of adult safeguarding. Consequently, this review has been underpinned by evidence-based research in the area of study. Findings The interaction between statutes, such as the MHA 1983 and Care Act 2014, signify challenges to professionals, with variable application of mental health legislation in practice. Research limitations/implications Lack of a complete national repository for review reports means that it is likely that the data set analysis is incomplete. It was noted that limitations to this research include the fact that Safeguarding Adults Boards in England may not publish SAR reports or may choose to publish an executive summary or practice brief instead of the full SAR report, therefore limiting the scope of disseminating learning from SARs, as this is difficult to achieve where the full report has not been published. The author aimed to mitigate this by undertaking comprehensive searches of Local Authority and SAB websites, in addition to submitting Information requests to ensure that this research encompassed as many relevant review reports as possible. Originality/value This is an important and timely topic for debate, given that the UK Government is proposing reform of the MHA 1983. In addition, existing thematic reviews of SARS tend to be generalised, rather than specifically focused on the MHA.

show abstract

Mental health law under review: messages from English safeguarding adults reviews

Cited by 2 publications

References 8 publications

On (not) learning from self-neglect safeguarding adult reviews

On (not) learning from self-neglect safeguarding adult reviews

The role of the Mental Health Act 1983 in safeguarding adults at risk of abuse and neglect: a thematic analysis of safeguarding adults reviews

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About