Analysis of Safeguarding Interventions for Clarrie's Case Study

This essay examines two empowering safeguarding interventions, Making Safeguarding Personal and Advocacy, and their suitability for a case study involving a young woman named Clarrie. Clarrie is struggling with an eating disorder and hoarding, living alone and refusing help from the mental health team, while facing eviction from her landlord. The essay discusses how Making Safeguarding Personal, which prioritizes the individual's control and well-being, could provide tailored solutions and promote her independence. It also explores Advocacy, emphasizing the importance of giving vulnerable individuals a voice and ensuring their rights are protected. The essay references relevant legislation, including the Care Act 2014, and highlights the advantages and disadvantages of each intervention, while emphasizing the importance of user-led approaches and addressing potential challenges faced by professionals. The analysis provides a comprehensive overview of how these interventions can be applied to support Clarrie, promoting her safety and well-being, and navigating the complexities of her situation.

Running head: SAFEGUARDING
SAFEGUARDING
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1
SAFEGUARDING
Safeguarding is a concept that creates a secure and comfortable environment in which
everyone is respected as well as valued. Safeguarding is used in organisations to prevent
harm, abuse and bullying. To ensure safeguarding, one requires to develop habits as well as
practices that will keep people safe. Safeguarding is used in the perspective of a child that
keeps attention on the policies of the organisations as well as the group and the policies they
implement regarding the safety of the child (Wood 2016). The purpose of safeguarding is to
protect people and report issues to the concerned authority. The strategies help in supporting
and safeguarding children and providing the necessary procedures that will help achieve the
above. Empowering people by encouraging them to make their decisions, preventing risk and
promoting their welfare, feelings and beliefs is a way of safeguarding people from
uncomfortable events (Craven and Tooley 2016). Children safeguarding policy helps in
promoting awareness as well as mitigating any risk that may be caused by employees as well
as representatives. The primary aim of the essay is to discuss Making Safeguarding Personal
and Advocacy as two interventions regarding safeguarding and show how it would be
suitable as well as proper for Clarrie.
A young women Clarrie is suffering from an eating disorder as well as having issues
with hoarding. She lives alone in a flat; however, she needs support as well as assistance from
the mental health team, but she does not want any help from the former. The landlord,
because of her behaviour, wants her to leave the flat, but she denies to comply with his
decision. In the situation of Clarrie, it is quite clear that she needs safeguarding interventions
that would protect and preserve her from unwanted behaviour of people and at the same time
support her. Making Safeguarding Personal is a safeguarding intervention that is led by the
person itself and is focused on the outcome (Wood 2016). It tries to engage the concerned
person in a conversation where techniques and methods are shared with on how to respond to
the safeguarding situation concerning them in such a way that enhances control, involvement

2
SAFEGUARDING
and choice on the one hand and the other hand improves the person’s wellbeing, quality of
life and security (Lawson 2017). In making safeguarding personal, information about the
person is collected so that it has a positive impact on the individual and people surrounding
them. It focuses on establishing an understanding of people’s wishes where negotiations are
carried out to work for their betterment. Therefore it would be a suitable approach to use it in
the case of Clarrie where the permanent solutions would be given to her regarding her
problem, and she will be able to apply the advice on her own as she does not want any help
from others. Making safeguarding personal when used in the case of Clarrie will also be
beneficial for the people who are living around her. Making safeguarding personal approach
will also protect Clarrie from uncomfortable circumstances. It will further help her resolve
her eating disorder and identify the internal problem that she is going through.
Even the legislation of the UK government pays extra attention to the safeguarding of
children. Their law focuses on protecting the children from all kinds of abuse as well as
neglect, preventing the development and impairment regarding their health and ensures that
the child is brought up in a safe and productive environment so that they are successfully able
to enter adulthood. The government further implemented the policy of Working Together to
safeguard Children, where the organisations, as well as individuals, would work towards
preserving and promoting the welfare of the children (Cooper, Cocker and Briggs 2018).
Therefore the above policy implemented by the UK government is similar to making
safeguarding personal that ensures the wellbeing of children as well as adults. Secondly, it
also promotes diversity as people who require safeguarding comes from different
backgrounds. The voices of all the different groups are heard and kept in mind whole
developing policies of safeguarding. Thirdly, making safeguarding personal also ensures that
people’s experiences, as well as knowledge, are rewarded and recognised by other groups
(Cooper, Cocker and Briggs 2018). This can be put into action by offering people the

3
SAFEGUARDING
opportunity for personal development. Some of the advantages of making safeguarding
personal are that it promotes equality amongst all. By justice, they try to restore a balance for
people who have long been neglected and discriminated. Some of the disadvantages of
making safeguarding personal are that the workload is very high, and therefore at times, it
becomes difficult to allocate work according to the available resources. Another disadvantage
is that people might face problems in building a relationship with adults as well as the
children and that the latter may not always follow their advice and be resistant to their
safeguarding techniques. Thirdly, the safeguarding model is not considered to be as essential
and necessary, as other factors. It is often ignored and avoided (Norrie et al 2017). Most of
the time, people forget that listening to the concerned person is also very essential rather than
telling the former to focus on their advice. Another criticism regarding the making
safeguarding personal in the past was that it would make the person more miserable than
before due to the protective methods that are implemented by the professionals (Norrie et al
2017).
In the UK legislation, the Care Act of 2014 was introduced to consolidate as well as
update the law regarding the care of adults in England. The Act was the most significant
evidence of legislation in the UK. According to the Care Act introduced by the UK
government, there are specific duties that need to be followed by the local authorities. It not
only pays attention to the person who requires care but also to their caregivers. The
responsibilities are- promoting the wellbeing of an individual, prior arrangement of resources
and services to prevent needs that arise for care as well as support, promoting care with the
help of healthcare services, giving advice to adults and caregivers, maintaining diversity and
quality of services and lastly co-operating with third parties (Cooper and Bruin 2017). The
Act further provides a scheme of direct payment that is made to the person who needs care as
well as support. The Act has also made provisions regarding disabled children as well as their

4
SAFEGUARDING
caregivers into adult services. Within this Act, the UK government also issues six essential
principles of safeguarding that are necessary elements for safeguarding policies in any
institution. The Care Act not only focuses on safeguarding adults but also focuses on
protecting children from harm, abuse and neglect (Johnson and Boland 2019). The six
principles are- empowerment, prevention, protection, proportionality, partnership and
accountability. Empowerment is recognised as the most essential element in safeguarding
where individuals are given power as well as the freedom to make their personal decision
reasonably. Prevention is a principle that prevents an individual from harm as well as abuse.
Protection further provides care to the vulnerable people and support the individual when
they need it. Proportionality is a principle in the UK legislation that ensures that every case is
dealt with individually and all the facts are taken into consideration. Furthermore, the law
believes that safeguarding should not be an individual process but promotes partnership and
put it into practice (Jacobs 2016). Lastly, every individual should be accountable for their
acts; there should be complete transparency and that safeguarding actions that are undertaken
by employees should be made clear to the concerned authorities. The principles can be used
for people of all ages. Therefore UK legislation on safeguarding has proved to be very useful
for people (Butler and Manthorpe 2016). These principles go well with the making
safeguarding personal that can be applied to the difficulty that Clarrie is facing in her daily
life. These principles will enable and motivate her to improve herself as well as the lives of
others.
The Adult Directors of Social Services (ADASS) completely supports the making
safeguarding personal approach and desires it to be implemented in all the councils.
According to Cooper et al., (2016) some areas are finding it difficult to comply with the
making safeguarding personal, and therefore the approach has garnered limited attention
within the partner agencies such as the police as well as the NHS. Therefore extra focus and

5
SAFEGUARDING
effort are still needed. Organisations should engage the users of their services while planning
and shaping the service.
The second intervention that the essay focuses on that will be helpful for Clarrie is
Advocacy. The latter is also an intervention in the area of safeguarding that ensures that every
person, specifically those who are vulnerable are given a voice for the issues that are
necessary for them. It works towards defending as well as safeguarding the rights of people
who need care and support. It also ensures that the views of the people are considered while
making policies and decisions (Hoefer 2019). Furthermore, advocacy is also a process that
enables people to express their opinions as well as concerns, give access to information,
defend the rights as well as responsibilities of people and explore choices and options for
them (Lonbay and Brandon 2017). An advocate, therefore, is a person who offers support
when one needs it. They help in getting access to information and assist people in their work
where they act in a supportive role. Advocacy is applied when one finds difficulty in
expressing their views and at times when one needs others to listen to them so that their
views are taken into account. The Care Act that was introduced by the UK legislation in 2014
also allows people to hire an independent advocate. Under the UK legislation, the advocate
can support people to make their assessments and safeguarding enquiries. An advocate will
help them to understand the process as well as options that are available for the individuals
regarding care and safety (Garner and Sandow 2018). The legislation further ensures that the
advocate can represent the individual whenever necessary and appropriate so that they can
challenge the decisions taken by the authority if they feel that the views of the concerned
individual were not taken into account. Lastly, the UK legislation makes sure that the
advocate helps their client to make meaningful decisions. The Care Act of UK legislation
also states that advocacy is only available for people who face substantial difficulty in being

6
SAFEGUARDING
engaged in their care process and who do not have a suitable individual to represent them
(Garner and Sandow 2018)
There are some of the advantages of advocacy such as it boosts the confidence as well
as self-esteem of an individual. Secondly, an advocate helps the individual to make correct
decisions that enable them to speak about abuse and other forms of neglect. Thirdly,
advocacy improves the services as well as the quality of life of an individual. The increases
the engagement of the volunteers and helps in building partnerships as well as alliances. It
also helps in solving the problems of the individuals and make the individual voice heard to
the community. It further assists in analysing the future scope of services that can be
available for the individual. It also effectively represents the views of the community (Winton
2018). On the other hand, there are some disadvantages to advocacy as well. An advocate
may not be able to form informed judgments that would have severe consequences for the
individual. Secondly, they may not plan effectively that will prevent the individual voice
from being heard. Most of the time, the evidence that is gathered in advocacy may not be
reliable that will prevent the advocate from making efficient decisions (Pocock et al 2016).
Therefore the approach of advocacy too can be applied in the case of Clarrie where
she will be provided with an advocate who will represent her and her views to the other
people and vice versa. The advocate will also see whether the people are considering
Clarrie’s while making and implementing decisions. It will give a voice to Clarrie, who is
unable to put forward and express her views and difficulties. On the other hand, by using the
UK legislation of advocacy will make Clarrie understand the implications of her actions.
It should be noted that advocacy is not a procedure of complaining instead supports
the individual to make a complaint effectively. It is also not providing any social support such
as handing of finances, nor is it a long term service. According to Fuller and McCauley

7
SAFEGUARDING
(2016), an advocate is necessary if the client does not have the capacity to do a job, however,
one of the limitations of advocacy is that there are very little advocated who are experts in
their field and are willing to invest their time for a social cause. Bresford’s (2017), in his
research on advocacy too points out that when a person who went through abuse in London
was provided with an advocate after months of the request.
The UK legislation also introduced the Mental Capacity Act in 2005 that applied to
England and Wales. The primary focus of this Act is to provide a legal framework, takes
action and makes decisions on behalf of the adults who are incapable of making meaningful
decisions for themselves. It protects and gives power to those who are physically and
emotionally vulnerable, individuals who cannot make decisions because they have a mental
disorder (Manthorpe and Samsi 2016). The UK legislation under this Act states five
principles- every person has the right to take his/her decisions, individuals should be
supported and encouraged to make their decisions, they can make decisions depending on
their values and beliefs, if a decision is taken on behalf of a disabled person then it should be
for the best interest of a person, and lastly, people with inability should be given the
fundamental rights as well as freedom (Murrell and McCalla 2016). Clarrie too is incapable
of taking necessary decision for herself because she has a mental disorder. Due to her lack of
incapacity to eat food properly, her brain might have been affected. Therefore, if UK
legislation of Mental Capacity Act is followed then Clarrie will be given the fundamental
rights as well as freedoms that will help her to become independent, something that she wants
as she declined help when she was offered. Advocacy can be applied to mental health
capacity Act of 2005 by providing people with psychological treatment; if the liberty of the
individuals is deprived, then the individual can seek help from a mental capacity advocate
(Lennard 2016).

8
SAFEGUARDING
Therefore to conclude, it must be noted that acts and policies should be made keeping
the disabled people in mind. It is necessary for the government to come up with more laws as
well as policies so that vulnerable people like Clarrie and others feel safe and secure in the
environment and people who are surrounding them. All organisations and country must
implement the policies that are introduced by the UK legislation regarding vulnerable and
mentally disturbed people. It is essential to know the importance of safeguarding so that it
can be applied to make efficient and effective policies. Making safeguarding personal ensures
that the person makes the decision himself/herself as they have better clarity of the
difficulties they are facing. They are supported indirectly, and the intervention pays attention
that the outcome that is delivered is beneficial for the concerned person. Advocacy, on the
other hand, assists individuals by providing them with an advocate who takes care of the
views of the individuals, support them and makes sure that the decision that is taken will
benefit the person. However, there are specific limitations of the interventions that should be
focused, and methods should be employed to do away with the disadvantages. The legislation
of the UK has given a lot of effort to maintain the rights and freedom of disabled people that
would inspire other countries to do the same. One should understand that disabled people
need extra care and attention that would require separate policies for them, but at the same
time, these policies should not create discrimination. Instead, the systems should work
towards integrating the disabled people amongst others to create equality.

9
SAFEGUARDING
References
BERESFORD, P., 2017. 30 Years of Service User Involvement and Advocacy. 30 Years of
Social Change, p.136.
Butler, L. and Manthorpe, J., 2016. Putting people at the centre: facilitating Making
Safeguarding Personal approaches in the context of the Care Act 2014. The Journal of Adult
Protection.
Cooper, A. and Bruin, C., 2017. Adult safeguarding and the Care Act (2014)-the impacts on
partnerships and practice. The Journal of Adult Protection, 19(4), p.209.
Cooper, A., Briggs, M., Lawson, J., Hodson, B., Wilson, M., Belderson, P., Brandon, M. and
Cocker, R., 2016. MAKING SAFEGUARDING PERSONAL TEMPERATURE CHECK
2016.
Cooper, A., Cocker, C. and Briggs, M., 2018. Making safeguarding personal and social work
practice with older adults: findings from local-authority survey data in England. British
Journal of Social Work, 48(4), pp.1014-1032.
Craven, B.M. and Tooley, J.N., 2016. Safeguarding children: Ofsted and regulatory
failure. Economic Affairs, 36(1), pp.64-79.
Fuller, S. and McCauley, D., 2016. Framing energy justice: perspectives from activism and
advocacy. Energy Research & Social Science, 11, pp.1-8.
Garner, P. and Sandow, S. eds., 2018. Advocacy, self-advocacy and special needs (Vol. 25).
Routledge.
Hoefer, R., 2019. Advocacy practice for social justice. Oxford University Press.

10
SAFEGUARDING
Jacobs, M., 2016. The spirit of the convention–Interlocking principles and ethics for
safeguarding intangible cultural heritage. International Journal of Intangible Heritage, 11,
pp.72-87.
Johnson, K. and Boland, B., 2019. Adult safeguarding under the Care Act 2014. BJPsych
bulletin, 43(1), pp.38-42.
Lawson, J., 2017. The making safeguarding personal approach to practice. Safeguarding
Adults Under the Care Act: Understanding Good Practice, London, Jessica Kingsley
Publications, pp.20-39.
Lennard, C., 2016. Fluctuating capacity and impulsiveness in acquired brain injury: the
dilemma of “unwise” decisions under the Mental Capacity Act. The Journal of Adult
Protection.
Lonbay, S.P. and Brandon, T., 2017. Renegotiating power in adult safeguarding: the role of
advocacy. The Journal of Adult Protection.
Manthorpe, J. and Samsi, K., 2016. Care homes and the Mental Capacity Act 2005: Changes
in understanding and practice over time. Dementia, 15(4), pp.858-871.
Murrell, A. and McCalla, L., 2016. Assessing decision-making capacity: The interpretation
and implementation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 amongst social care
professionals. Practice, 28(1), pp.21-36.
Norrie, C., Stevens, M., Graham, K., Moriarty, J., Hussein, S. and Manthorpe, J., 2017. The
advantages and disadvantages of different models of organising adult safeguarding. British
journal of social work, 47(4), pp.1205-1223.
Pocock, M.J., Evans, D.M., Fontaine, C., Harvey, M., Julliard, R., McLaughlin, Ó.,
Silvertown, J., Tamaddoni-Nezhad, A., White, P.C. and Bohan, D.A., 2016. The visualisation

11
SAFEGUARDING
of ecological networks, and their use as a tool for engagement, advocacy and management.
In Advances in Ecological Research (Vol. 54, pp. 41-85). Academic Press.
Winton, S., 2018. Challenging fundraising, challenging inequity: Contextual constraints on
advocacy groups’ policy influence. Critical Studies in Education, 59(1), pp.54-73.
Wood, C.B.E., 2016. Review of the role and functions of Local Safeguarding Children
Boards. Report, The Stationery Office, London.