Editorial
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.5042/jap.2011.0065 |
| Pages | 2-4 |
| Published date | 21 February 2011 |
| Date | 21 February 2011 |
| Author | Margaret Flynn |
| Subject Matter | Health & social care,Sociology |
2 © Pier Professional Ltd The Journal of Adult Protection Volume 13 Issue 1 • February 2011
10.5042/jap.2011.0065
Editorial
Here is the story – in 2011, England and Wales
are still awaiting the outcome of consultations
regarding adult safeguarding. If these tasks had
been externally commissioned by either the
Department of Health or the Welsh Assembly
Government, the consultants would long since
have been relieved of their duties. The want
of urgency implied by such foot-dragging is
not matched by the frustration of individuals
whose support services are wanting or by the
individuals who are seeking to assist vulnerable
adults who are being, or have been, harmed.
Two articles in this edition consider the
circumstances of two such people.
The first is David Cooper. You may recall
his name from media coverage at the time
of his death in 2006. He had epilepsy and
schizophrenia and had been ‘befriended’ by a
woman with whom he had hoped to have a
relationship. We are grateful that Sheree Green,
a solicitor, draws on David’s circumstances to
take us through the minefield of financial abuse
and the challenges of assisting vulnerable adults
who have been targeted by those with parasitic
intentions. Although there were people in
David’s neighbourhood who were concerned
that the arrival of a woman, her children and
boyfriend in David’s home was associated with
his increasing isolation and the sale of his land,
their attempts to help him resulted in further
isolation. Even though solicitors have a duty of
confidentiality, it is known that one solicitor
contacted a successor to alert them to concerns
regarding David’s rapidly reducing finances and
ostensible generosity to this woman. Her undue
influence rendered her the sole beneficiary of
David’s property and capital. David died in
squalid circumstances while his beneficiary
resided in luxury funded by him. Sheree Green
considers how the Mental Capacity Act 2005,
a Lasting Power of Attorney and the Court of
Protection might have protected David.
David is not the first person to be targeted
and he is unlikely to be the last. The Observer
newspaper (Doward, 2010) described how
criminal gangs befriend lonely and vulnerable
people before taking over their homes for drug
dealing. Described as ‘cuckooing’, gangs are
able to operate from unobtrusive premises and
terrify their victims into co-operation and
silence. The circumstances of David’s death
are a further reminder of the limitations of
anachronistic terms such as ‘financial abuse’ and
‘emotional abuse’.
Kate Rees’ article scythes through any
illusion that funding your own care guarantees
delivery of safe residential care to older people
with dementia. Kate’s mother was evicted from
care homes when Kate expressed concerns
about her mother’s persistent bruising. No
one appeared to be alert to, or accountable
for, her mother’s very visible bruising. It was
easier for four homes to evict Kate’s mother
than to become attentive to ways in which
bruising and pain might be avoided. As a
self-funder, it is unlikely that Kate’s mother’s
existence was known to the local authority in
which the homes were located. Self-funders
are unlikely to receive overdue attention
in an era of fast-track service cuts. Alisoun
Milne’s commentary on this article reminds
us that there are over 400,000 older people in
care homes in the UK, few of whom are in a
position to challenge poor practice. Further,
so little is known about their biographies
and relationships. While such knowledge is
essential for the sensitive and professional
care of older people, gathering it takes time
To continue reading
Request your trial