In this essay I will discuss one major change introduced by the Care Act 2014, namely the way in which adults were protected. The term “safeguarding” is used to describe a wide range of duties, measures and powers in the criminal justice, health, housing and social care sectors. Research indicates that safeguarding means protecting an adult's right to live in a safe environment, free from abuse and neglect. It involves professionals and other individuals working together to prevent and end risks and experiences of abuse or neglect. It is also about ensuring that the welfare of the adult is supported and taking into account the views, wishes and feelings of service users when deciding on any action. Since the Care Act 2014 came into force, there have been many changes impacting safeguarding practice, including directions such as the personalization of safeguarding. This enables practitioners to have a positive approach towards service users, which engages them in their safeguarding situation. Another change that influences protection under the Care Act 2014 is the force-based perspective which is used to help protect the individual from harm. It focuses on the service user's situation, vulnerabilities, strengths and qualities of the client. This essay will also include the implications of this during practice. Before the Care Act 2014, there was no set method for local authorities to assess protection, but there is now. This will also be included as well as how users of the service can manage risks. Throughout this essay I will discuss a case study which shows how failures of social work workers impacted on the safety and risk of two service users. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Before the Care Act 2014, safeguarding practice used personalization as the center stage of practice for over a decade. Personalization is an approach to social care which states that each person who receives support, whether provided by a statutory service or self-funded, will have choice and control over how that support is shaped in their circumstances. healthcare establishments. Personalization is about the dignity and well-being of the individual. The Care Act 2014 came into force in April 2015 and replaced previous laws relating to carers and people being cared for. This law describes how local authorities must carry out carer and needs assessments. Also considers how local authorities should determine who is eligible for support and what rates for residential and community care should be. This act is mainly aimed at adults in need of care and support. There are, however, provisions for the transition of children in need of care and support and young carers. But there is guidance on this in the Children and Families Act 2014. Before the Care Act, statutory services were responsible for safeguarding for many years, but there were no clear laws behind that. Therefore, it remains unclear who is responsible for what in practice. One of the safeguarding guidelines in the Care Act 2014 is “Making Personal Protection (MSP)”. This means that the backup mustbe people-led and results-oriented. During this conversation, they will learn how to best respond to a safeguard that develops involvement, choice, and control. As well as improving the quality of life, well-being and safety of users of the service. There was a recent case that showed a social worker failed to protect his client by not attending hospital discharge meetings and not being able to develop a plan care that would suit the client. The research shows that the practitioner had admitted that he was not competent for this role and had failed the client. This case study effectively shows that this is one of many social work practitioners who felt under pressure.pressure at work. But despite this, he failed to seek help and support, leading to him failing in his role, which also resulted in significant risk to the service user (Haynes 2018). This shows that the social worker failed to comply with safeguarding policies such as 'Making Safeguarding Personal' and did not follow the Care Act 2014. The reason is that when he had a meeting with the service user, the service user did not open the door. But the practitioner did not follow up with the client or try other means of contacting the service user. For example by letter, SMS or via a third party such as a family member. Following advice from the MSP, it states that the practitioner must promote choice, control and involvement in their case. But based on this case study, this was not possible, among other things, such as ensuring the safety of the service user upon discharge from hospital. According to the case study, it is stated that the practitioner received another case discussed in this article. He was tasked with an investigation as the service user was at risk as the client suffered from autism and an emotionally unstable personality disorder. This referral has been made so that the appropriate care plan and support is in place to help the service user. However, the practitioner did not look into the matter or investigate it. When questioned about this, he did not explain why he did this. Research indicates that MSP is not just for local authorities, but is for everyone. This includes everyone involved in healthcare delivery and safeguarding support. MSP focuses on the person, not the process. In this case the practitioner did not pursue the matter further and used the MSP's advice to assist in practice and provide the best possible outcome for the service user. The policies underpinning the MSP help those working with adults to develop rapid and personalized safeguarding responses. They also include how to involve the customer in decision-making. MSP is great to use, it has many benefits for both the client and the practitioner, the reasons for this being that as mentioned previously it is person led and results oriented which empowers individuals and brings value. hope to the client as they work on their care plans. with the appropriate support around them. He also takes the customer's wishes into consideration. But the safety of customers must also be taken into account, because they cannot have anything that would put them in danger. For example, in the case study, the client suffered from autism and an imbalanced personality disorder. He might ask to socialize and go to the local pub alone every week. However, due to his condition, he may not recognize social cues, such as the ability torecognize who is safe to talk to and who is not. They could easily be manipulated into drinking excessively or could be manipulated by other people. This is why requests can be taken into account, but whether or not they are met by healthcare professionals depends on their safety. Protection must be considered in all cases and references to protect the client from any harm or risk. Research suggests that when acting in a person's best interest, one should not make assumptions about a person's mental capacity based on their age, appearance, or mental state. Also consider the individual's past and present beliefs, values, wishes and feelings. The next point for discussion is the force-based approach to protecting an individual, in line with the Care Act 2014. The Care Act requires local authorities to adopt a force-based approach force throughout a service user's journey and this must be implemented in all interventions and interactions with the service user. The strengths-based approach is a process between a service user, different services and the healthcare professionals who support them. This approach allows them to work collaboratively to decide on an outcome that focuses on the strengths and assets of the service user. The terms strengths and assets refer to the different skills and qualities that help the service user to manage things on a daily basis and which will therefore help them meet their needs and achieve their goals. For example, it may be the individual's abilities, skills and knowledge. Also the social aspect of the individual such as the resources he has around him such as community centers, colleges, social programs. This also relates to the community resources available to the individual. Referring to the case study, it says the practitioner failed to assess the service user, prepare care plans and consider the risks involved. However, based on strengths-based practice, social work practitioners are expected to conduct care plans and risk assessments to enable them to identify the individual's strengths and areas for development. Yet in this case it was not followed, this is not to say that force-based practice is not effective, but rather that the practitioner was not competent enough to fulfill their role. Social workers have many responsibilities and commitments to the users of their services, but the case article stated that the service he worked with was poorly organized. This leads to failure of the team as a whole, not just the practitioner. According to research, when implementing the strengths-based approach in social work, practitioners must spend time researching and familiarizing themselves with community resources. The person who would be held accountable would be the practitioner and appropriate time should be allocated for the assessment so that nothing is missed. The social worker did not assess the client who was discharged from the hospital or the other client he was assigned to to investigate her risk. He also didn't prepare a care plan like he was supposed to. Therefore he failed as a professional, vulnerable and at risk clients, he also failed in terms of the team he worked with. The practitioner did not devote time to their duties towards service users and therefore was not successful in their role. Regardless of the effectiveness of the strengths-based approach inIn practice with clients and practitioners, social workers face many implications in practice. Senior and middle management as well as practitioners may be affected as they will need to make adjustments and tolerances to accommodate the Strengths-Based Approach (SCIE). Referring to the case study, he said the practitioner worked under pressure and struggled to manage cases. However, he did not seek help or raise this issue with the professionals above him. If he had talked to someone, he would have gotten some kind of support that would have helped him in practice. The practitioner has let themselves down in this field, as practitioners are aware before qualification that this is a role that carries a lot of pressure and responsibility. As an individual you need to be able to ask for help when needed, this also impacts the competence of your role. As assessments may take longer than usual, this also includes assessment preparation and closure, as each case is different and unique in its own way. Also because practitioners need to have greater knowledge and awareness of community resources, especially in the area of ​​their work. The research suggests that the person raising a safeguarding concern within their own agency should follow the policies and procedures provided. This concern usually results from something the practitioner has seen, heard or told about. Social workers would carry out an assessment to clarify safeguarding issues. If there are safeguarding concerns, such as being a victim of financial abuse, emotional abuse, physical abuse or other factors, appropriate action will be taken to protect the adult from danger and provide him with a safe environment in which to live. He may be urgently referred to supported housing if the abuse is serious. happening at home, and they can report it to the police and other professional agencies if appropriate. At first contact, it should be clarified whether adults' safeguarding concerns fall within adults' safeguarding duties set out in the Care Act 2014. According to research, local authorities have new safeguarding duties; they must have a local multi-agency adult protection system. The goal of this system would be to prevent abuse and neglect and quickly end it when it occurs. They will need to find out about the risks of abuse and neglect and find out what measures they will need to take. The local authority should also establish safeguarding guidance, meaning the NHS and police will be involved where appropriate to share and implement a strategy. If the service user dies as a result of neglect or abuse, then inquiries will be made to the local authority. or their partners to find out what they could have done to protect the individual. In the case article it was stated that the management team had been alerted about the practitioner, when a client had died two months after being referred to the local authority. Additionally, there were two other cases which were discussed in this essay which resulted in a tribunal being held and the practitioner being suspended from their role. During a safeguarding investigation or review, the service user may need a solicitor to represent and support the individual. The practitioner would also look at this. Before the Care Act 2014, there were no set assessments that local authorities had to follow in relation to safeguarding. But since the..