Search results

The purpose of this qualitative study was to investigate how the proceedings of a vulnerable adult protection policy is understood by referrers to affect the psychological and emotional well‐being of adults with a learning disability. During the research process seven referrers of vulnerable adults discussed twelve different cases in in‐depth interviews. The interviews and matching case notes of protection meetings released by social services were analysed by the application of grounded theory techniques. The result is a model that highlights how appraisals of the experience the emotional and behavioural reactions of the vulnerable adults are shaped by the nature of the abuse, the actions taken by protection meetings, the expectations of the vulnerable adults and the availability of support.

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.

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”.

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”.

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.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the outcome of referrals made to one police force in England by three local authorities between March 2010 and April 2011, in order to identify and understand the barriers to prosecuting suspects of abuse or harm against vulnerable adults, and improve inter-agency co-operation.

All referrals to this police force are given a crime number when they are recorded on the Criminal Justice System database together with a vulnerable adult flag and a status code which indicates the outcome following a police investigation. A search of the database using the vulnerable adult flag identifies the total number of referrals and outcomes for the selected period. This can then be imported into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet to allow further analysis to take place.

Over 87 per cent of all referrals of alleged abuse to vulnerable adults made to this police force did not establish that a crime had been committed. Of those that did only 1 per cent resulted in either a caution or court proceedings.

This is a small sample from one, predominantly rural, police force.

The benefit of this research is that it contributes to a greater knowledge of the outcomes of adult safeguarding referrals made, primarily, by local authorities to the police and how police disclosures, on Disclosure and Barring Service checks, are being used as a means of providing employers of regulated activities with information on individuals who have been suspected of abusing vulnerable adults.

In adult protection many of the concerns that are highlighted about possible abuse relate to non‐criminal situations in which neglect may have occured. Designated lead managers, often social services team managers, act as gatekeepers. In conjunction with police, health and inspectorate colleagues they have to determine if allegations and referrals should be dealt with either as possible abuse or as poor practice, triggering different mechanisms. A tool has been developed in Wales to promote and support consistency in decision‐making in ‘grey areas’. Also, the Welsh Assembly Government(2009) has published helpful guidance on the management of escalating concerns in care homes, which helpfully informs arrangements for adult protection and provider performance to be managed in tandem.

The purpose of this paper is to describe and analyse the development and content of the Vulnerable Adults Act 2018 (hereafter “the Act”) in Singapore. It reports the parliamentary processes and deliberations.

A synthesis of publicly available research, policy documents, parliamentary debate, media reports and commentary.

The paper sets the Act’s development and aims in Singapore’s social and legal contexts. It notes the interface with other legislation and the focus of the Act on community and family abuse and neglect.

The paper suggests some areas for research including how the Act is used and its impact and also points to areas where the Act does not apply.

The paper outlines new professional powers and responsibilities and the role of government and community-based organisations.

This paper provides an early account of the genesis and aims of the new legislation, its powers and administration. Also, international comparisons are drawn.

The purpose of this paper is to identify aspects of leadership and evaluate their contribution to safeguarding vulnerable adults in healthcare organisations through conducting a critical review of literature. To identify or adapt a leadership framework to contribute to safeguarding vulnerable adults in healthcare organisations through analysis of the literature.

The methodology was qualitative and inductive. It was based on constructivism and an interpretive theoretical perspective, beginning without hypothesis. Themes emerged during the process. A critical review of literature was undertaken to answer the research question. Literature was sourced from a variety of health and social care databases and grey literature. All inclusions underwent rigorous critical appraisal and a total of 18 papers were explored.

The importance of clear leadership and direction was a common theme across the majority of sources. Aspects of leadership that can safeguard vulnerable adults in health care organisations include organisational culture, implementation of policies, procedures and frameworks, and reinforcing strong values and ethics around empowering individuals and delivering person-centred care. Through the meta-synthesis of findings, a model of leadership emerged.

The critical review utilised only one reviewer and the proposed leadership framework has not been empirically tested.

The paper proposes a leadership framework that can be applied within healthcare organisations to safeguard vulnerable adults.

This paper fulfils the need for evidence that supports the belief that strong leadership can safeguard vulnerable adults. It provides a comprehensive review of existing literature in this area.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight contemporary issues in achieving best practice in safeguarding adults across multi‐agency settings.

The paper is an empirical exploration, reviewing a range of relevant literature and recent policy to present evidence suggesting that there continue to be challenges in achieving best practice in multi‐agency approaches to safeguarding. The literature review was undertaken using the following databases: Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Cochrane, PsycINFO and Medline. The inclusion criteria included being peer‐reviewed and published between 2004 and 2012. The key words used were: “safeguarding adults” and “abuse”. Further literature was found through adopting a “snowballing” technique, in which additional sources were found from the reference lists used in the initial articles.

Although guidance such as No Secrets from the Department of Health, in 2000, emphasises the importance of a multi‐agency approach, this continues to be problematic and presents challenges. In practice, differing professionals may not fully understand each other's roles and responsibilities and both thresholds and scope of adult abuse are still not universally agreed. Legislation could be used positively to mandate the multi‐agency approach to adult safeguarding, supported by local Safeguarding Adults Boards and local policies can be used to provide guidance and clarity for practitioners. Further empirical investigation into supporting the multi‐agency approach is required.

The paper fulfils the need for discussion on the complexities and challenges that continue to present in multi‐agency responses to adult safeguarding practice.

This paper describes the current guidance in the Police and Criminal Evidence (NI) Order and associated codes of practice as they relate to the detention and questioning of juveniles and vulnerable adults. The provision of appropriate adults services is described with reference to a recent research study and recommendations made in the Criminal Justice Review, commissioned as part of the Good Friday Agreement.

The parallels between child abuse and adult abuse have been frequently noted as public awareness of both has increased in recent decades. Both can involve the concealed victimisation of a weaker family member, for both interventions are difficult to implement because practitioners are loath to intrude into the privacy of the family and risk causing harm, and combating abuse of either type demands multi‐agency working. Significant differences between the two abuse constituencies have also been stressed, namely that adults are not invariably dependents reliant for care on the persons mistreating them and have the autonomy to resist efforts to intervene on their behalf.

This paper discusses how Kent Social Services addresses situations in which one vulnerable adult abuses another. This can challenge professional competencies and open up services to outside investigation but, say the authors, a punitive approach will undermine efforts to ensure that abuse by service users is recognised and dealt with appropriately.