Leading the fight against      adult abuse

Need information or support?
Call our helpline     UK:   0808 808 8141
  ROI:    800 940 010  

About Us  |  Contact Us  

We've won (maybe...)

Protection for adults at risk of abuse in England or Wales is covered by documents called  No Secrets  (England) and In Safe Hands (Wales).  These were  issued as guidance in 2000, under section 7 of the  Local Authority Social Services Act 1970.  

Section  7 guidance does not carry the same status as  legislation; instead local authorities have their compliance assessed as part of a statutory inspection process.  With ‘good reason’ a local authority can ignore such guidance.  No other Agency is influenced by Section 7 guidance.  As a consequence we are failing to adequately protect older people and other vulnerable adults and this is why AEA made such a substantial submission to the No Secrets Review.

Following ongoing representations by AEA, and the publication of a Prevalence Study into the extent of elder abuse, the Government committed to a review of the effectiveness of No Secrets.  Wales subsequently made a similar commitment in relation to In Safe Hands.

The Consultation on No Secrets ended on 31 March 2009, some twelve months ago.  In July 2009 the Government issued a selective analysis of the responses it had received, but made no statement as to the policy response.  We have pursuing this matter since then and, on Tuesday 19 January 2010, Phil Hope as Minister for Social Care came to the House and made a statement.  In essence the Government has committed to the introduction of framework legislation, the establishment of an inter-departmental Ministerial group on adult safeguarding, and work stream between now and the Autumn.

We are now consulting with our colleagues in the Safeguarding Adults Alliance as to what should be our next steps.  While we obviously must support this statement as a positive commitment to safeguarding adults, the timing of the announcement means it is now caught in the slide toward the General Election (and no commitment has been given as to when the legislation will be enacted), and there are many issues not covered by the statement which need clarity e.g. how will the Boards be funded? Will there be a duty to share information and cooperate?  There was no reference to powers for the Boards to actually intervene in abuse situations, and no mention of personalisation despite the fact that this process was a major facet of the consultation.

In response to the statement AEA issued a News Release that welcomed it as progress, but highlighted the areas still to be addressed.  There is no doubt that we successfully achieved the commitment to framework legislation.  But it doesn't end there, or this will be a hollow victory.

Below, we publish a letter from our CEO, Gary FitzGerald, to all our supporters on this issue:

An open letter to all our supporters:

The effectiveness of adult protection has been under scrutiny since Ivan Lewis announced the review of No Secrets in June 2007.  (No Secrets is the guidance issued in 2000 on the protection of adults at risk of abuse.  It’s the equivalent of child protection, but without the funding or legal basis).  Back then there was a feeling that adult safeguarding had finally arrived, but two and half years later it is difficult to be that optimistic.

The review of No Secrets repeatedly stumbled, as personalisation issues overtook safeguarding ones, legislation became an unacceptable word, and the focus switched away from its original objectives.  Of course empowerment has to be integral to safeguarding.  Enabling people to ‘say no’ to abusers, understand their options and control State involvement must be an effective strategy.  But we equally cannot ignore those who are worn down by abuse, or conditioned by abusers, or compromised by (often family) relationships.  And often it seemed that those points were being ignored within the review.   

Since January 2009 safeguarding has been in limbo, with no political direction, nothing ‘ruled in or out’, and civil servants having to be reminded that the outcome was still outstanding.  It seemed to have been ‘kicked into the long grass, so the commitment to create statutory Safeguarding Boards, an inter-departmental Ministerial group, and on-going workstreams, is good news.  But the devil is in the detail and the timing. We have a General Election looming, and legislation will only happen when Parliamentary time allows, meaning discussions with a new Government are now inevitable.

The only firm commitment given by the Minister therefore is the work to produce No Secrets 2, (the favoured option of civil servants).  Everything else is now very much dependent upon the results of the Election, and there are mutterings around Parliament to suggest this is exactly why the announcement has been made at this time – the Government can claim the political high ground in having given the commitment, without having to think (at least currently) about actually delivering it.

Consequently, as a minimum we now have to focus on the work of No Secrets 2, while we pursue commitments by all three main parties to honouring a legislative approach.  And we have to get these work-streams of No Secrets 2 to include:

• Funding.  Protection cannot be a financial football bounced between central and local Government.  Every community must have access to an adequately staffed and funded service, but at the moment there is no consistency with some areas far better resourced and staffed than others;

• Intervention legislation.  Guidance on current laws will be helpful, but we must also address the tensions between an individual’s right to self-determination and State responsibilities to intervene.  There is a difference between informed choice and coerced choice.  Sometimes people need to be protected.  Currently, the Government is listening almost exclusively to the voice of younger adults with physical disabilities who are far more capable of defending themselves than frail, older people.  We have to influence this;

• Personalisation.  Individual choice and control should be an incontrovertible right and, for many, Direct Payments/Individual Budgets provide an excellent way of achieving this.  But they are not for everyone.  Much abuse relates to people who groom, coerce or manipulate others into vulnerable situations.  Often they abuse positions or relationships of trust, and this can be similar to the dynamics of domestic violence.  Again, the Government is listening almost exclusively to the voice of younger adults with physical disabilities who are far more capable of managing budgets than frail, older people, and they are pushing this strategy forward without addressing the risks.  (Of course, the fact that this new policy is also estimated to save between 3% and 10% on the social care budget (which equates to millions of pounds) makes this a very attractive option for local authorities).  Consequently, we need to push for the tools to blend personalisation and safeguarding safely together.

The Minister’s statement in the House on Tuesday 19 January 2010 may at first appear as though we have won the arguments, but in fact it will mean very little unless we can ensure that the commitments are delivered by whichever party ends up in power after May.  And we have to ensure that we keep pursuing those issues which are not popular to be raised – and these very much revolve around making sure that the new personalised ‘cash for care’  strategy is not forced onto older people in a way that worsens their lives and places them at even more risk.

A very influential statutory organisation told AEA recently that we represented the only sane voice speaking up for older people on personalisation.  We must keep doing so, and above all within this imminent safeguarding debate, because the stakes are too high.  Particularly for older people, but also for those many other adults at risk of abuse, and I am thinking here of so many people with learning disabilities and mental health issues who are also in seriously vulnerable situations.

Gary FitzGerald
CEO
Action on Elder Abuse.

More Information:

Sign our petition for adult protection legislation

Background and key points about the consultation

Letter from the Director General to AEA about the Review

Response to the Director General from AEA CEO

92% of submissions made it clear that legislation was need to create an effective framework within which adult safeguarding could be delivered.  These submissions included the police, local authorities, Directors of Adult Social Services, adult protection experts, the British Association of Social Workers, the care and health regulators, and most Third Sector organisations.