Recent Submissions

  • Stigma, epistemic injustice, and “looked after children”: The need for a new language

    Fieller, Danielle (2022)
    Abstract This article examines the processes that contribute to the stigmatization of a group of people typically identified as ?children in care? or ?looked after children.? In particular, we will look at the ways that we (adults, professionals, and carers) interact with these children, based on their status as both children and members of a socially marginalized and disadvantaged group, and how these modes of interaction can inhibit dialogue?a dialogue that is needed if we are to base our conceptions regarding the needs of these children on a more accurate understanding of their experiences and perspective. The problem is particularly challenging because the very terminology we use in the care community to identify this group is a product of the damaging preconceptions that have affected our interactions with its members and, we argue, it serves to reinforce those preconceptions. Using Fricker's work on epistemic injustice, in conjunction with evidence regarding how accusations of abuse and neglect of these children have been addressed in numerous cases, we illustrate the problems we have in hearing the voices of members of this group and the harmful effects this has on their own ability to understand and articulate their experiences. These problems represent ?barriers to disclosure? that need to be surmounted if we are to establish a more inclusive dialogue. Currently, dialogue between these children and those of us charged to ?look after? them is too often characterized by a lack of trust: not only in terms of the children feeling that their word is not taken seriously, that their claims are not likely to be believed, but also in their feeling that they cannot trust those to whom they might disclose abuse or neglect. The goals of the paper are modest in that we aim simply to open up the debate on how to meet this epistemic challenge, noting that there are specific problems that extend beyond those already identified for hearing the voices of other victims of epistemic injustice. Explicitly recognizing the nature and extent of the problem still leaves us a long way from its solution, but it is a crucial start.
  • Evaluation of an evidence-based model of safeguarding clinical supervision within one healthcare organization in the United Kingdom

    de Oliveira, Deborah (2019)
    AIMClinical supervision has been recognized as a valuable mechanism through which healthcare professionals may evaluate, reflect upon and develop their clinical practice within the context of safeguarding. However, while there is a general consensus with regard to the value of clinical supervision there are multiple approaches to utilization in practice. This brief communication provides an overview of an evaluation of one model of safeguarding clinical supervision which was explicitly developed to support healthcare professionals in their everyday practice.METHODSThe current study used a survey approach, which involved the development and administration of an online anonymous survey with clinical supervisors and supervisees working within the one service of the Trust.RESULTSThe survey results showed that individuals were overall confident, knowledgeable and satisfied with their safeguarding supervisions. However, individuals at a lower band were significantly less positive about supervision, particularly in relation to how much they felt enabled to explore their safeguard concerns, how much they felt equipped to provide/receive safeguarding supervision and about how much they understood clearly the difference between managerial supervision/clinical and safeguarding supervision.CONCLUSIONA number of key recommendations arising from the findings of the evaluation are presented in this article and are considered in terms of the question 'what constituents form the core components of a successful Safeguarding Supervision Framework relationship?'
  • The deprivation of liberty safeguards: Observations and limitations

    Phull, Jaspreet S. (2011)
    The recently introduced Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which came into force in April 2009, was created to protect the liberty of people lacking capacity admitted to care homes and hospitals in England and Wales. This paper discusses observations and some limitations of the DoLS for protecting the liberty of residents within institutional settings. The regulation, safeguards and recent relevant case law are examined critically. The author suggests that their effectiveness may be limited by the under-recognition of cases, ambiguity and limited safeguards within the statute. The paper concludes that the DoLS legislation has been a positive step towards protecting the liberty of those lacking capacity but that limitations present could undermine the purpose of the legislation.
  • Safeguarding vulnerable adults' liberty: The law

    Sergeant, Michael (2009)
    In response to a landmark legal case, the government has made changes to legislation in an attempt to uphold the rights of vulnerable adults who are subject to extensive restrictions. The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards were introduced in April. They apply to people over the age of 18 who lack capacity to consent to arrangements for their care. People with a learning disability in hospitals and care homes will be protected by the safeguards. Healthcare professionals must be aware of, and identify possible situations of, deprivation of liberty to comply with the law.