Front-line staff and volunteers should always report safety concerns in accordance with their organization`s policies. Policies should clearly indicate how confidential information should be shared between departments within the same organization. Effectiveness should be monitored and any internal communication issues resolved. Non-statutory inquiries (known as `other precautionary examinations`) may also be conducted or initiated by local authorities in response to concerns about carers or adults who do not need care and support but who are still at risk of abuse or neglect and to whom the local authority has a `duty of welfare` under section 1 of the Care. This guide is part of a series of products to support the implementation of aspects of the Adult Care Act, 2014. Sharing the right information with the right people at the right time is fundamental to best practices in adult protection, but it was highlighted as a challenging area of practice. The obligation of local authorities to conduct safety investigations or have investigations carried out does not give you an automatic right of access to the adult who is the subject of the investigation if the person or a person associated with them tries to prevent you from seeing them. If a person refuses to intervene to help them because of a security concern, or requests that their information not be shared with other protection partners, their wishes must be respected. However, there are a number of circumstances in which the practitioner may reasonably override such a decision, including: You should understand the basic principles of Mental Capacity Act when making decisions regarding the disclosure of personal data for security purposes. There are five basic principles. If a safety concern is raised with the local authority involving a health facility or health professional, the local authority coordinating the safety investigation must forward the information about the problem, the professionals involved and the request to the appropriate clinical selection group. Clinical commissioning groups are NHS Service Commissioners, including NHS trusts.
While many applications require a lot of input from a social worker – often a social worker – some aspects will need to be done by other professionals with the necessary skills and knowledge. For example, it may be a health care professional who has the closest relationship with the person and is best placed to investigate a particular concern with them in the first place. If clinical, medical or nursing care concerns have been raised, the local authority should discuss with the clinical commissioning group safety team to decide who best has the appropriate clinical expertise and knowledge to ask questions and where advice can be sought. The manager contacts the local authority that gets the lead and they agree that a joint visit with a social worker should be arranged. Don and Meiling (the social worker) go to see Alice. The situation has not improved. Alice is still reluctant to grant them access, but admits that she needs help to master both her hoarding and self-sufficiency. This guide is intended for front-line practitioners and managers who work with adults who need care and support and are at risk of abuse or neglect. It is relevant to people working in health, housing, police and social care – both statutory social workers and staff in regulated and non-regulated provider sectors. The guidelines identify a number of difficult safety dilemmas and aim to clarify how they should be addressed in the new regulatory framework. It does not address strategic commissioning issues and does not address the role of Adult Protective Counsel (ASCs).
An adult who is being abused or neglected may have to make difficult decisions and, therefore, may need time to consider the risks involved and the desired outcomes. Making risks and options clear and understandable is essential to empowering and protecting adults and recognizing people as “experts in their own lives.” Some people need more support than others to make risk management decisions. Making risks clear and understandable is essential to empowering and protecting adults and recognizing people as “experts in their own lives.” If an adult is unable to make risk management decisions on their own, the options identified should be discussed with their representative or advocate so that the adult can maintain control over their life as much as possible. Adult protection obligations apply in all environments where people live, with the exception of prisons and licensed premises such as bail homes. They apply regardless of whether or not a person has the capacity to make certain decisions for themselves at certain times. Sometimes a person needs care and support and cannot protect themselves for a short period of time – for example, when they are under anesthesia in hospital. Once MASH has received this report, it will investigate and, if necessary, request a Section 42 safeguard examination. The local authority, as the lead security authority, should ensure that all partner organisations – not only legal partners, but also housing organisations, care providers and others – have signed a local information exchange protocol. If there are doubts about the adult`s capacity, a formal mental performance assessment should be conducted to take into account the adult`s understanding of the safety issue and their ability to consent to a precautionary examination.
If there is evidence that the adult is incapable, the Mental Capacity Act Code of Conduct should be followed and consideration should be given to using an independent mental capacity advocate if the adult has no one to assist them. For persons who are incapable and suspected of being responsible for ill-treatment, appropriate advocacy should be considered to assist and represent them in the ongoing investigation. The Care Act 2014 explicitly requires local authorities to work with partner agencies to actively promote people`s independence and well-being, rather than simply responding to crises as they arise. This applies to the protection of adults in need of care and support, with the goal of preventing abuse and neglect where possible (or repeated). Nimesh explains to David why he needs to raise security concerns and explains that social services need to determine whether it is necessary to involve the police. The youth`s care needs should be at the forefront of any support planning and require a coordinated inter-agency approach. The assessment of care needs at this stage should include protection and risk issues. Care planning must ensure that the safety of young adults is not compromised by delays in providing the services they need to maintain independence, well-being and choice. If the individual cannot be persuaded to consent, they should be informed that the information will be disclosed without consent, unless it is considered unsafe. The reasons must be stated and documented.
The principle of proportionality should underpin decisions to disclose information without consent and decisions should be taken on a case-by-case basis. If it is not clear that the information should be shared outside the organization, a conversation may take place with police or local authority security partners without revealing the identity of the individual in the first place. They can then indicate whether full disclosure is required without the consent of the individual concerned. It is important to always be aware of the pressures caregivers may face and to consider why they make certain decisions and actions. The opening of a precautionary procedure carries the risk that a difficult situation will be made more difficult for caregivers and the person they care for. The caregiver may be doing the best they can, but they are still struggling. They can put the person at risk because they set themselves up under pressure, not because they intend to intentionally harm them.
