Search results

Health and social care agencies located in rural areas face particular challenges if they are to be able to effectively support people with dementia within their communities. Ann McDonald and Becky Heath describe a piece of work carried out in three rural counties in East Anglia that mapped services across the statutory, voluntary and private sectors and explored how national policy was being interpreted to meet local need. The findings confirm that services for older people with dementia are under‐developed compared to those for older people generally, but reveal that there is the potential to develop community‐based and inclusive services for people who have dementia.

Services for people with dementia in the UK have developed piecemeal in the context of wider agency agendas. Health and social care agencies located in rural areas face particular challenges if they are to be able to support people with dementia within their communities. This article describes a piece of work carried out in three rural counties in East Anglia designed to map services across the statutory, voluntary and private sectors, and to describe the ways in which national policy is being interpreted to meet local need. Examples of innovative practice, as well as gaps in service design and delivery, were identified through an examination of local policy documents and qualitative interviews with strategic managers, frontline managers and practitioners, and local carers of people with dementia. The findings confirm that services for older people with dementia are under‐developed in comparison with services for older people generally, and in comparison with mental health services for working age adults. There are particular gaps with respect to rarer types of dementia, services for people with learning difficulties, and services for people from minority ethnic groups. Historically, a lack of strategic planning has meant that service development has been patchy and unco‐ordinated. Carers have been affected by a shortage of joined‐up information, high eligibility criteria and a change to short‐term working by practitioners. Nevertheless, the potential for developing community‐based and inclusive services for people with dementia is apparent, and the adaptability required of rural areas may, subject to further evaluation, provide a template for service development elsewhere.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a literature review on what is known about unpaid family carers who are at risk of or have experienced abuse from the people they provide care for and relevant policy/legal and practice responses for affected family carers.

A literature search was carried out to locate literature relating to unpaid family carers who are at risk of or have experienced abuse from the people they provide care for. This also incorporated grey literature, including policy guidance and law, to determine the existing knowledge base, gaps in practice and areas that might require further research.

The findings suggest that although carer harm is serious, it is under-researched. In addition, the unique needs of unpaid family carers who are at risk of or have experienced abuse, violence and harm from the people they provide care for are subsumed in safeguarding policy/law processes and practice under the auspices of the protection of “adults at risk” rather than the protection of “carers at risk”.

It is important that those who support unpaid family carers who are at risk of abuse and harm know about their unique safeguarding needs and concerns to offer appropriate support. It is also apparent that policy and law need to address the gap in provision relating to the unique safeguarding concerns involving the abuse of unpaid family carers by the people they provide care for. This paper is based on this literature review and not on other types of research.

The paper provides insights into what is known about the abuse of unpaid family carers by the people they provide care for, and the policy/legal and practice responses to affected unpaid family carers. It contributes to the body of knowledge on carer abuse and safeguarding carers from abuse and harm.

New Public Management-informed pay-for-performance policies are common in public sectors internationally but can be controversial with delivery agents. More attention is needed on contingent forms of bottom-up implementation of challenging policies, in emerging market economies, for professionals who face tensions between policies and their codes of practice. Street-level bureaucrats (SLBs) mediate policy implementation through discretionary practices; health professionals have enhanced space for discretion based on autonomy derived from professional status. The authors explore policy implementation, adaptation and resistance by physicians, focusing on payments for health workers in Turkey.

The researchers conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with 12 physicians in Turkish hospitals and thematic analysis of interview transcripts, using a blended (deductive and inductive) approach.

The policy fostered discretionary behaviours such as cherry-picking (high volume, low risk procedures) and pro-social rule-breaking (e.g. “upcoding”), highlighting clinical autonomy to navigate within policy restrictions. Respondents described damage to relationships with patients and colleagues, and dissonance between professional practice and perverse policy incentives, sometimes leading to disengagement from clinical work. Policymakers were perceived to be detached from the realities experienced by SLBs. Tensions between the policy and professional values risked alienating physicians.

This study utilises participant self-reported perceptions of discretionary behaviours. Further work may adopt alternative methods to explore the relationship between self-reporting and observed practice.

The authors contribute to research on differentiated, contingent roles of groups with high scope for discretion in bottom-up implementation, pointing to the potential for policy-professional role conflicts between top-down P4P policies, and the values and codes of practice of professional SLBs.