Editorial
| Pages | 2-3 |
| Published date | 01 April 2004 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/14668203200400001 |
| Date | 01 April 2004 |
| Author | Paul Kingston |
| Subject Matter | Health & social care,Sociology |
2© Pavilion Publishing (Brighton) Limited The Journal of Adult Protection Volume 6 Issue 1 • April 2004
Editorial
Much hope has been placed on the
emergence of policies and procedures to
develop an effective strategy for health and
welfare agencies engaged with allegations of
abuse and neglect of adults. In 2000 the
government signalled its decision to act in
this area with the guidance No Secrets (DoH,
2000). The first article in this issue, by Keith
Sumner, reports on progress to date by local
authorities charged with developing
strategies for adult protection. Local
authorities were asked to prepare local
strategic partnerships to take forward the
specific elements of the No Secrets guidance
by 31 October 2001. The Centre for Policy
on Ageing was commissioned to analyse the
documents on submission to the
Department of Health by October 2001.
A picture emerges of uneven progress. It
appears that most agencies report the ability
to develop high-level strategic commitment,
with little new resource. The evidence also
suggests that strategic commitment does not
always develop into resource at the local
multi-agency forum level (only 13% of
documents include information on the
resource implications of No Secrets).
However, as chief executives begin the
process of reviewing progress through
annual reports this dichotomy should
become more apparent. The level of resource
by individual agency should be made
explicit in all new annual reports.
Other significant points noted in the
research relate to little evidence of comment
on training – especially inter-professional
training – and the absence of a preventative
agenda. Progress has been least noted in
public relations and community education,
with very few agencies developing shortened
documents for either staff or the general
public. Documents in alternative languages
and audio/Braille were almost non-existent.
In a period in which attention is moving
towards a reconfiguration of child protection
services it is vital that concentration remains
focused on the continued development of
the adult protection agenda. Sumner’s study
gives a baseline for future analysis.
The second insightful and provocative
paper, by Katherine Jeary, outlines an area
where it appears little progress has been
made in relation to adult protection case
conferences: namely mechanisms to hear the
‘victim’s voice’. Jeary and Professor Olive
Stevenson analysed the views of 50 adult
protection case conference participants or
policy makers. In contextualising their work
they point out that the contemporary view
that victims should have the opportunity to
express their opinions and aspirations has
perhaps yet to permeate into day-to-day
practice in adult protection case conferences.
It appears at this time aspirational, and not a
reality (only one in 10 victims were present
at conferences). There are of course many
reasons for non-attendance and the authors
move on to explore a variety of reasons;
nonetheless more energy is required to solve
such omissions.
One central question that perhaps needs
significant attention relates to whether case
To continue reading
Request your trial