Safeguarding Intervention: Care Act 2014 and Case Study

This essay delves into the critical realm of safeguarding interventions, focusing on the protection of vulnerable adults, as exemplified in a case study involving an elderly couple. The essay begins by defining safeguarding and outlining its core principles, emphasizing the importance of empowerment, prevention, and partnership. It then explores two key interventions: 'making safeguarding personal' and 'positive risk-taking,' analyzing their application within the context of the case study. The main body of the essay includes a case study of an elderly couple facing challenges including a mini-stroke, memory loss, and potential financial exploitation. The essay justifies the use of safeguarding interventions by drawing on relevant legislation, particularly the Care Act 2014, and providing evidence-based rationale for the chosen approaches. It highlights how the Care Act 2014 provides a legal framework for protecting individuals at risk of abuse and neglect. The essay examines the importance of personalized approaches and the need for care intervention, concluding with a reflection on the significance of safeguarding practices in ensuring the safety and well-being of vulnerable individuals.

Lifecycle Development

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3
MAIN BODY..................................................................................................................................3
Safeguarding intervention............................................................................................................3
Justify the reason for using Safe-guarding intervention drawing on relevant legislation,
guidance and evidence.................................................................................................................5
Care intervention with person at risk...........................................................................................8
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................9
REFRENCES.................................................................................................................................10

INTRODUCTION
Safeguarding interventions are seeking the issues which a person is facing and helps in
taking correct actions for safety of people. Safeguarding means to protect health and rights of
humans so that they can live their happily (Braye, Orr and Preston-Shoot, 2017). Some principles
of safeguarding are, empowerment, prevention, protection, partnership, proportionality and
accountability. These principles will help in protecting human rights and people can live safe and
healthy life. There are some safeguarding interventions such as, making safeguarding personal
and positive risk taking which is discussed. Reasons for using safeguarding intervention are
described and its application in given case.
MAIN BODY
Overview of case
In the given case study, Florence and her husband Errol is living in UK and they are
having three children but all of them had left home. All children are doing their work and settled
in their life. Errol is diagnosed as having a ‘mini stroke’. Due to this he has become forgetful and
confused, he is not able to understand what is happening. Florence is not able to handle the
situation alone, she is shouting at Errol and then regrets it because her husband is not well and
they both need support of their children. Condition of house was not so good and it requires
repair so for that a man, George told them that they had tile loose on the roof which he will
repair and did not charge for that. Florence and Errol also received notice that their gutters need
cleaning, after sometime George did a range of jobs such as, painting and repair other things. But
he was charging high and Florence was not able to afford it. Florence think George a nice person
and give keys of house to him. After some time, she noticed that several things are missing in
house, she asked Errol about it but he said that he is not knowing anything about this. Her
necklace was also missing and Florence was scared and she was not able to understand how
things are missing. Her neighbour Sanjit, noticed that Florence is distressed and he contact social
services for help.
Safeguarding intervention
Safeguarding intervention is important because it helps in preventing harm and reduce risk
of abuse and harm. It raise awareness among public so that they can live life safely and there will

be no harm. It is essential that some steps should be taken by social worker to protect rights of
human and give them better life (Cooper, Cocker and Briggs, 2018). People should be alert and
there are many awareness programs are organised in which steps for safety are being presented.
Two safeguarding interventions are discussed below:
Making safeguarding personal
Making safeguarding personal is a intervention whose purpose is to develop an outcome,
support people and reduce risk. It helps in solving issues of public by providing them better
services and prevent them from harm and abuse. There are some principles of safeguarding
personal are, accountability, prevention, protection and partnership. This help in providing better
protection and essential steps is being taken for safety and security of people. Making
safeguarding personal refers to talking about adults and care for them in such a way that it will
enhance choice, control, involve adults and helps in improving quality of life. Safety and security
of people is important and they should live their life without any harm or risk (Lewis and et.al.,
2017).
Making safeguarding personal is helpful in improving health of an individual person. it
focuses on outcome and care act is also focusing on safeguarding adult. In case, Errol is forgetful
and confused so safeguarding personal will help in improving health of Errol and it will prevent
a person from mini stroke. Protection should be given to an individual person and managing
safeguarding personal will help in improving quality of life. Errol is a person at risk and
suffering from multi -stroke dementia in which he forget things and is depending on his wife.
This is different from other person because due to this problem Florence has to manage all things
and take care of Errol. He forget things so, may be he has taken things from house and not
knowing about it. His family is facing many difficulties as Errol can not live alone because he
can go anywhere. Florence has to take care of him and have to handle all problems.
Positive risk taking
Positive risk taking refers to a process whose aim is to encourage and support people in
fighting against risk or harm and helps in achieving personal growth or change. It help in
managing risk by increasing confidence of people and provide them better services to face
challenges. Positive risk-taking helps in weighing up potential benefits and taking correct actions
to handle issues. It includes, using available resources and support public to achieve desired
outcomes. This safeguarding intervention helps in minimising harmful outcomes and prevent

people from harmful situations (MacIntyre, Stewart and McCusker, 2017). It helps in controlling
life of an individual person and create positive environment so that people can feel relaxed and
safe. It helps people in learning from their mistakes and should not repeat it next time.
According to given case, Florence and Errol need help and must be prevented from
harmful situation. Errol’s health is not good and Florence is not able to handle all issues, she
needs help. George is charging high amount for repairing things but Florence is not able to afford
it. She gave keys of house to George and after that thing are missing. Florence need help of
social worker so that all problems can be solved and live life easily. Florence should think
positive and try to find out that how things are missing. Positive risk taking intervention will help
Florence in identifying who has stolen her necklace and she can live life safely.
Justify the reason for using Safe-guarding intervention drawing on relevant legislation, guidance
and evidence.
Positive Risk taking – According to the given case study, it has been found that Florence
looking distressed because she cannot find a gold necklace, and was become scared to speak to
George. On the basis of this incident, it is very important to manage and control risks, when
increasing the people’s choice and control over their live.
On the basis of evidence, it has been justified that positive risk taking is one of the best
safeguarding intervention in order to recognise the potentially negative characteristics of George
in case study. Risk taking can be considered as positive advantage, benefits for both Florence
and her husband. It is enabling them to do certain things, which is the most people take for
granted (MacIntyre, Stewart and McCusker, 2017). Within given scenario, George cannot
charged with Errol for purpose of fixing roof. He was offered the best price so that Errol feel so
much impressed with his work. But at that time, it may be increased the risk-taking situation due
to the trust on stranger person. That’s why, this is main reason for consideration of positive risk
taking safe-guarding intervention in order to maintain and control safety aspects. The reason for
using the positive risk taking safe-guarding intervention on the basis of case study, Errol is a
person at risk which makes him forgetful and dependent of his wife Florence. In this way, it is
very tough for his family to face a normal situation or condition.
Making safeguarding Personal- On the basis of case study, The reason for choose making
safeguarding personal intervention which means that support for Errol from his family. He was
diagnosed as having had a ‘mini stroke’ and ‘multi-infarct dementia’. In this situation, Errol

needs a personal support from family, friends and colleagues. Making a safeguarding personal is
the most commonly used intervention which may support for creating safeguard culture or
environment. In order to focus on the personalised need or demand of Errol in the case study.
According to the evidence, it is an important aspect for individual people who require a proper
care and support in proper manner. it has been justified that Adult or older safeguarding should
be used on the personal-led. It emphasizes a personalised approaches to provide the better
safeguarding. Justify the reasons when applied “making safeguarding personal intervention
because of Errol suffer a health problem and needs a personal support from family, friends and
colleagues. Making a safeguarding personal is the most commonly used intervention which may
support for creating safeguard culture or environment. Making safeguarding Personal
intervention is helping to protect the rights of Errol and live in safety free from abuse or neglect.
In order to apply the Care act 2014 legislation in order to protect or secure lives of Errol and his
families.

Care Act 2014 for safeguarding interventions
The Care Act 2014, it sets out a clear legal framework for identifying how local
authorities and other kind of system should protect or secure individual at risk of abuse. Usually,
it has been established a safeguarding Adults boards including NHS, police and local authority.
These are developing an appropriate safeguarding intervention in order to provide the best
quality of facilities or services (Findon and Johnston-Wilder, 2018). According to the care act
2014, it has been developed a wide range of social care concerns and activities. This kind of
legal action is not only provide the better option for individuals but it provide the adults
safeguarding. In order to minimise risk of threat.
In context of safeguarding interventions, the care act 2014 is one of the most suitable
legal framework and using best practices. It should be considered the user-led approach in order
to address the problem of individual people (Braye and Preston-Shoot, 2019). This is the best
way to encounter issues by professionals, when they work in valid or particular criticism of
safeguarding.
In the given case, Florence and Errol is living alone and they are not able to manage all the
activities. Errol need proper care and treatment so that he can get well soon and live their life
happily. It is important that proper care should be given to Errol so that he can get well soon and
handle all issues. Care act 2014 is best option which will be beneficial for Errol and Florence, he
will get good treatment and recover soon. Florence is not having money and she want to pay
money to George for repairing house. If they will take help from social worker then all their
problems will be solved. Florence should tell her neighbours about what problem she is facing
because they can help her and give suggestions. She should call her children and take help from
them because they will her and take care of both.
In case, Florence is trusting George and give keys of house to him which is not correct.
She should take help from anyone and try to find out that who has stolen things and file a case.
Safeguarding interventions are made for providing safety and security to public. Rules and
regulations, acts are made for benefit of people and they should fight for their rights because it is
important to take necessary steps against wrong activities. When people will raise voice against
wrong then only government can help them and health department is also providing so many
facilities to people. Florence should take help from other people and provide good treatment to
Errol so that he can get well soon.

Care intervention with person at risk
Safeguarding intervention can be applied in given case study because in case, Errol is not
well and he is confused, not understanding anything. Florence is alone to handle all problems,
she should contact with her children and ask them to come home. It is not easy for Florence to
solve all issues alone because she has to give proper care to Errol so that he can get well soon
and they can live their life. Making safeguarding personal and positive risk taking will help
Florence in solving her problem and she can find better way to handle issues. After keys of house
is given to George all things are missing and in starting, George said that he will not charge
money for repairing house. After some time, he was asking for money and Florence was not able
to afford it. When she will take help of social worker then all issues will be resolved and she can
live life safely and there will be no problem. When a person is suffering from any disease then
care intervention should be applied so that individual can recover soon. Errol should take rest at
home and not go anywhere. Some tracking devices can be used for identifying where Errol is
going and cameras may be used so that Florence can know that who is taking away all things.
In the given case, Errol is not well so it is the responsibility of Florence to provide him
proper care and take him to doctor. She should contact with her neighbours and take help of
them. Safeguarding interventions are made for safety and security of people from harm or risk. It
is important that necessary steps should be taken by social workers so that people can live their
happily. Therapy should be given to person at risk, provide support, conduct counselling, assist
in organising resources, appropriate moves to residential care facilities. In given case these
interventions can be applied to help Florence and protect her from risk. She has to handle issues
and also take care of her husband (Toska and et.al., 2017). The aim of safeguarding intervention
is to prevent people from risk and boost their confidence to face issues. It is important that
necessary steps should be taken to prevent Florence and her husband.
Care prevention means to provide good treatment to a person who is at risk or suffering from any
disease (Stevens and et.al., 2020). There are three types of prevention such as, primary,
secondary and tertiary prevention. Proper care should be given to person who is not well because
it is important that all people should live their life safely and there must be no problem. To

prevent public from risk and harmful impact several safeguarding interventions are made so that
it will be easy to handle issues and people can live safe and healthy life (Young and Everett,
2018) .
Person centred care or client care focuses on needs of person instead of service. It is crucial
to save life of a person, aim of person-centred care is to focus on needs of individual and try to
provide them best treatment. There are some rules and legislations should be made by health
department for safety of public. Person- centred care focuses on fulfilling needs of individual,
ensures that people preference, values guide and clinical decisions, try to provide good services
to people so that they can live healthy and safe life (Floyd and et.al., 2018). It is an ongoing
process and can be complex because it requires coordination. Some key characteristics of person-
centred care are, it assesses outcomes and well- being for continuous improvement in quality,
education and training is being provided to persons so that proper treatment can be given to
people. There is proper flow of information among employees and they work with coordination.
It helps in achieving goals and objectives, good care is given to people so that they can get well
soon (Eklund and et.al., 2019). In the given case Errol is not well and he requires proper
treatment and Florence is not having enough money for managing all the activities. She should
take care of her husband and try to provide best treatment so that he can get well soon. She has to
handle all issues as her house needs to be repair and Errol is also not well.
CONCLUSION
From the above discussion it can be concluded that, safeguarding prevention is essential for
safety of people. it helps in preventing public from risk and necessary steps are being taken to
solve issues. Two safeguarding interventions i.e., making safeguarding personal and positive risk
taking has been discussed. Justification of safeguarding intervention has been described and its
application to case study. Further, care prevention has been discussed and some ways by which
better care can be provided to people.

REFRENCES
Books and Journals
Braye, S. and Preston-Shoot, M. eds., 2019. The Care Act 2014: Wellbeing in Practice. Sage.
Braye, S., Orr, D. and Preston-Shoot, M., 2017. Autonomy and protection in self-neglect work:
the ethical complexity of decision-making. Ethics and Social Welfare. 11(4). pp.320-
335.
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.
Findon, M. and Johnston-Wilder, S., 2018. Working together to promote academic safe-
guarding. School Leadership & Management. 38(2). pp.164-186.
Floyd, K., and et.al., 2018. The global tuberculosis epidemic and progress in care, prevention,
and research: an overview in year 3 of the End TB era. The Lancet Respiratory
Medicine. 6(4). pp.299-314.
Lewis, N. V., and et.al., 2017. Training on domestic violence and child safeguarding in general
practice: a mixed method evaluation of a pilot intervention. BMC family practice. 18(1).
pp.1-13.
MacIntyre, G., Stewart, A. and McCusker, P., 2017. Safeguarding adults: Key themes and issues.
Palgrave.
MacIntyre, G., Stewart, A. and McCusker, P., 2017. Safeguarding adults: Key themes and issues.
Palgrave.
Stevens, M., and et.al., 2020. Practice perspectives and theoretical debates about social workers’
legal powers to protect adults. Journal of Social Work. 20(1). pp.3-22.
Toska, E., and et.al., 2017. Sex in the shadow of HIV: A systematic review of prevalence, risk
factors, and interventions to reduce sexual risk-taking among HIV-positive adolescents
and youth in sub-Saharan Africa. PloS one. 12(6). p.e0178106.
Young, J. M. and Everett, B., 2018. When patients choose to live at risk: What is an ethical
approach to intervention?. BCMJ. 60(314). p.8.
Eklund, J. H., and et.al., 2019. “Same same or different?” A review of reviews of person-
centered and patient-centered care. Patient Education and Counseling. 102(1). pp.3-11.