Search results

The purpose of this study is to compare the UK demographics of forced marriage of people with learning disabilities and people without learning disabilities to inform effective safeguarding practice.

An analysis of all cases of forced marriage reported to the UK Government’s Forced Marriage Unit (FMU) between 2009 and 2015.

People with learning disabilities are at five times greater risk of forced marriage than people without learning disabilities. Men and women with learning disabilities are equally likely to be forced to marry, whereas amongst the general population, women are more likely than men to be forced to marry. Patterns of ethnicity, geographic location within the UK and reporters are the same for people with and without learning disabilities.

The analysis is based on cases reported to the FMU, and for some cases, data held was incomplete. More importantly, many cases go unreported and so the FMU data does not necessarily reflect all cases of forced marriage in the UK.

Forced marriage of people with learning disabilities is a safeguarding issue. Practitioners across health, education, criminal justice and social care need to better understand the risk of forced marriage for people with learning disabilities. Links to practice resources developed as part of the wider project are provided.

This is the first time that researchers have been given access to FMU data and the first time that a statistical analysis of cases of forced marriage involving someone with a learning disability have been analysed.

Services for adults with learning disabilities are currently based on the promotion of four key principles: rights, independence, choice and social inclusion. This paper will argue that, while these principles are welcome, they need to be balanced against a fifth principle ‐ that vulnerable adults must be protected adequately against the risk of abuse. It will draw both on recent high‐profile cases of violence and abuse against people with learning disabilities and on research evidence to explore whether current plans to transform adult social care through the use of self‐directed support and individual budgets offer a safe future.

The aim of the research described was to gather information about both the objective and the subjective experiences of self‐advocates who had attended learning disability partnership boards, in order to promote effective practices. Findings show that, although people with learning disabilities were present at meetings, a variety of barriers limited their ability to participate actively. Problems included lack of financial and practical help as well as the limited availability of accessible information. There were also, however, examples of good practice, and many self‐advocates were pleased at how their local authorities were beginning to implement effective partnership working practices. Ways of supporting self‐advocates and other people with learning disabilities to fulfil a truly representative, rather than a merely symbolic, function at partnership board meetings are discussed.An accessible summary of these findings is available to download from the project website: www.bris.ac.uk/Depts/NorahFry/Strategy/papers.htm

This article reports the findings of research which examined the impact that the Supporting People programme has had on housing and support for adults with learning disabilities. The issue was explored from the perspectives of local Supporting People teams, commissioners and providers of specialist learning disability social care services, and people with learning disabilities themselves.

Valuing People outlined ambitious plans for improving services for people with learning disabilities in England. Strategies to realise these goals were to be taken forward through the new structure of learning disability partnership boards, based in the first instance on local joint investment plans (JIPs). This article reports findings from an analysis of the first round of learning disability JIPs, compiled as the implementation of the White Paper began, and reviews the implications for the development of robust local strategies and action plans.

Services for adults with learning disabilities are currently based on the promotion of four key principles: rights, independence, choice and social inclusion. This paper will argue that, while these principles are welcome, they need to be balanced against a fifth principle ‐ that vulnerable adults should be adequately protected against the risk of abuse. It will draw on both recent high‐profile cases of violence and abuse against people with learning disabilities and research evidence to explore whether current plans to transform adult social care through the use of self‐directed support and individual budgets offer a safe future.

The issue of forced marriage is typically located within debates on violence against women, immigration control and cultural difference and is rarely considered in relation to adults with learning disabilities. The purpose of this paper is to argue that this is an issue which needs to be addressed by Safeguarding Adult Boards.

This paper draws upon original research undertaken by the author in conjunction with the Ann Craft Trust, a voluntary sector organisation which supports statutory, independent and voluntary sector organisations across the UK to protect adults at risk. The project sought to establish the extent to which the issue of forced marriage of people with learning disabilities is recognised, understood and acted upon by Boards.

Although many Boards are aware of national policy guidelines, very few had incorporated these guidelines into their local practice. There were two key consequences of this. First, Boards were failing to monitor cases of forced marriage and were unable to plan preventative services. Second, frontline workers were not given necessary training and so were unable to develop effective skills of knowledge. The need for both better recognition of and improved responses to the problem of forced marriage of people with learning disabilities is highlighted, as is the need for the safeguarding workforce to be supported by more effective strategic planning and better training.

This paper draws upon original research which examined how Safeguarding Adult Boards are responding to the issue of forced marriage of people with learning disabilities – a problem currently very much under-represented in existing research and practice literature.

This paper seeks to report some of the findings from an evaluation of adult safeguarding in one English local authority. The evaluation was commissioned in the context of concern regarding the number of safeguarding investigations that resulted in inconclusive outcomes.

All adult social care teams in the local authority were asked to complete a short pro forma about the five most recent adult safeguarding alerts that they had managed to completion. Data collected included: characteristics of the alleged victim and alleged perpetrator; details of the professionals involved; whether or not a safeguarding plan meeting/case conference was held; and the outcome of any investigation. Respondents were also asked to comment on factors that they perceived to have helped or hindered the investigation.

Findings suggest that a significant number of variables influence the likelihood of cases resulting in a conclusive outcome. These variables included not only the characteristics of alleged victims, but also elements of safeguarding practice – including inter‐agency co‐operation, social workers' pre‐existing knowledge of the alleged victim, and the convening of safeguarding plan meetings. A failure to actively involve alleged victims in the safeguarding process was also noted.

This is a relatively small sample from a single local authority.

This is the first study to provide qualitative evidence about the factors which influence the success or otherwise of adult safeguarding practice. The findings are likely to be of value to professionals working in adult safeguarding who are seeking to understand “what works” in managing investigations following safeguarding alerts.