Purpose
To ascertain what efforts Adult Safeguarding Leads (ASLs), generic advocates, and Independent Mental Capacity Advocates (IMCAs) 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
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 our 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.SJ’s contribution was funded by
The Health Foundation. Support for MR, AJH and ICHC was provided initially by the
NIHR CLAHRC for Cambridgeshire & Peterborough), and subsequently by The
Health Foundation (MR) and the NIHR CLAHRC East of England (AJH and ICHC).
The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS,
the NIHR or the Department of Health.This is the accepted manuscript. The final version is available at http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/JAP-11-2014-0031
