Putting people at the centre: facilitating Making Safeguarding Personal approaches in the context of the Care Act 2014

Butler, Louise; Manthorpe, Jill

doi:10.1108/jap-03-2016-0003

Cited by 17 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…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. WhilstButler et al (2016) and Timpson et al…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Montgomery

Hanlon

Armstrong³

2017

JAP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose-This paper describes a small scale pilot study undertaken in Northern Ireland to gather service user feedback from individuals who have been subject to adult safeguarding procedures. Design-The aims, methods and findings of the 'Adult Safeguarding: 10,000 Voices' pilot project are presented. Findings-The pilot project highlighted how an initiative which captures the experiences of patients, service users, carers and staff in the health and social care sector (10,000 Voices) could be successfully adapted for use in adult safeguarding, facilitating the collation of complex experiences and enabling insights to be gleaned and shared. Limitations-The pilot study is limited by the small number of participants. The findings are preliminary. Practical implications-For the first time in Northern Ireland the 10,000 Voices model was utilised in the context of a non-health related service, namely adult safeguarding. Social implications-This outline of the model and methodology for obtaining service user feedback can inform user involvement in other contexts. Originality-This paper provides an accessible overview of an innovative approach to engaging service users in adult safeguarding, such approaches to date have been limited.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Montgomery

Hanlon

Armstrong³

2017

JAP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It may also reflect subtle but powerful inequalities in the ‘credibility economy’ in which knowers and listeners interact. In the UK, health and social care professionals work within a policy and legislative framework that emphasises individuals’ rights to self‐determination and the need to protect and prioritise the needs of adults requiring care (Butler and Manthorpe ). Whilst there may be a clear ethical and legal basis for this position it is nevertheless possible to see how, in some situations, this perspective can lead to carers’ needs being unintentionally rendered less visible, particularly if carers’ views seemingly contradict or undermine the needs and wishes of the person for whom they care.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Female family carers’ experiences of violent, abusive or harmful behaviour by the older person for whom they care: a case of epistemic injustice?

Isham

Bradbury‐Jones

Hewison

2019

Sociology Health & Illness

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Family carers affected by violent, abusive or harmful behaviour by the older person for whom they care face social and epistemic challenges in developing and sharing knowledge about their experiences. These difficulties have contributed to a situation in which there is a paucity of evidence and public discourse about how we understand violence and harm instigated by people who have care needs or are ‘vulnerable’. This paper reports the findings of a qualitative study that involved 12 in‐depth interviews with female carers affected by violence, abuse or harm. The study was informed theoretically by Miranda Fricker's concept of epistemic injustice which was used as a framework for analysis. There were two principal findings: (1) Carers were sensitive to anticipatory stigma and loss of moral autonomy. As a result, they self‐censured what they shared and, at times, were met with subtle but powerful processes of silencing. (2) Carers had limited linguistic and conceptual resources to explain the emotional and social aspects of the harm they experienced, exacerbated by implicit social norms about the ‘private’ and gendered nature of familial care. To conclude, we discuss the implications of these findings for sociological research and health and social care practice.

show abstract

“…This person-centred approach to adult safeguarding is also a key feature, and success, of Making Safeguarding Personal (Butler and Manthorpe, 2016), which is also now a requirement under the Care Act Statutory Guidance (Department of Health, 2016, para.14.14-14.15). Likewise, paragraph 14.11 of the Care and Support Statutory Guidance (Department of Health, 2016), for example, states that one of the aims of the adult safeguarding provisions is to “safeguard adults in a way that supports them in making choices and having control about how they want to live”, and furthermore, at paragraph 14.39-14.40, that:It is important to understand the circumstances of abuse, including the wider context such as whether others may be at risk of abuse, whether there is any emerging pattern of abuse, whether others have witnessed abuse and the role of family members and paid staff or professionals […] The circumstances surrounding any actual or suspected case of abuse or neglect will inform the response.…”

Section: “Adult At Risk”: Vulnerability By Any Other Name?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the statutory guidance to the Care Act, for example, any safeguarding response should be based on the six principles; empowerment, prevention, proportionality, protection, partnership, and accountability (Department of Health, 2016, para.14.12). Moreover, the guidance also makes clear that any adult safeguarding enquiry and response should be person-focused, take into consideration the circumstances of that particular adult, and driven This person-centred approach to adult safeguarding is also a key feature, and success, of Making Safeguarding Personal (Butler and Manthorpe, 2016), which is also now a requirement under the Care Act Statutory Guidance (Department of Health, 2016, para.14.14-14.15). Likewise, paragraph 14.11 of the Care and Support Statutory Guidance (Department of Health, 2016), for example, states that one of the aims of the adult safeguarding provisions is to 'safeguard adults in a way that supports them in making choices and having control about how they want to live', and furthermore, at paragraph 14.…”

Section: Concern Was Also Voiced During Thementioning

confidence: 99%

“Adults at risk”: “vulnerability” by any other name?

Pritchard‐Jones

2018

JAP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore and critique the conceptual and terminological shift – particularly from “vulnerability” to “adult at risk” – in adult safeguarding under the Care Act 2014 and the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014. Design/methodology/approach The paper compares the notion of the vulnerable adult in safeguarding, with the notion of an adult at risk under the Care Act 2014 and the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 and questions to what extent such a shift addresses existing criticisms of “vulnerability”. Findings The paper criticises the notion of the “vulnerable adult” for perpetuating the stigma associated with an impairment or disability, and for the types of legal and policy responses deemed appropriate under such an understanding of vulnerability. While efforts to replace the term “vulnerable adult” with “adult at risk” are, to some extent, to be welcomed, “adult at risk” under the legislation relies on the same characteristics for which the “vulnerable adult” has been criticised. Nevertheless, the safeguarding provisions under the two Acts have made some strides forward in comparison to their legal and policy predecessors and the notion of the “vulnerable adult”. Originality/value This paper’s originality and value lie in its scrutiny of the notion of “vulnerability” in adult safeguarding, in comparison to the newer terminology of an “adult at risk”, whilst also suggesting that in important respects – in relation to the interventions deemed appropriate where an adult is perceived to be at risk – the two pieces of legislation are a marked improvement on their predecessors. It also offers some thoughts as to how criticisms of the new legislation may be overcome.

show abstract

Putting people at the centre: facilitating Making Safeguarding Personal approaches in the context of the Care Act 2014

Cited by 17 publications

References 8 publications

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

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

Female family carers’ experiences of violent, abusive or harmful behaviour by the older person for whom they care: a case of epistemic injustice?

“Adults at risk”: “vulnerability” by any other name?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About