Why not the same outrage at the NAS care home abuse story as at Oxfam?

[sickofsocalledexperts]

Just that really. There was terrible abuse of vulnerable autistic and learning disabled adults at the National Autistic Society's Mendip House in Somerset. They were ridden round like horses, fed chillies, slapped and thrown in the swimming pool - all "for a laugh" and by NAS staff in a residential home that they had themselves accredited. The NAS first tried to "bury the bad news' by unveiling it via a new Twitter account with only 21 followers last Friday (marking a new low in PR strategies). And then, when that strategy backfired in spectacular fashion with a huge online backlash, they earnestly promised to be totally transparent and produce a full timeline about who knew what when . This, almost amazingly , they also tried to sneak out on Wednesday with little fanfare and using the same link (it's still up on Facebook, so if you weren't looking, you wouldn't know a new statement has been issued). Jeez, who's doing their PR?

Now sh*t happens, and bad apples turn up in institutions, but it's how quickly and how transparently you deal with them that says whether your organisation prioritises a) making damn sure this kind of abuse never happens again by shining a bright light on what went wrong or b) covering their arses.

As mum to a boy who is autistic and learning disabled, and could never tell me if someone was being nasty to him behind closed doors, I"m appalled not just by what happened at Mendip House but also how they've handled it. It's both dumb and cynical.

Also think the new statement contradicts their earlier PR positioning - that action was immediate once head office were informed of the abuse, but that sadly there were two years before that when "local management" didn't report the abuse upwards. The new timeline is playing some very silly games with wording, which gives me even less confidence that this is in fact true.

Were these poor people left at the mercy of abusive practice for 2 years because the NAS is basically a shower of shi*e?

Two things are for sure: 1) they've damaged their brand even more with this sneaky PR strategy and 2) my beloved boy will set not one foot over the door of an NAS-run school or home.

www.facebook.com/NationalAutisticSociety/

The law specifically relating abuse of vulnerable adults is only really developing at the moment. Police forces are playing catch up a bit and some are much much better than others. Some unfortunately see it as solely social services responsibility to sort out and historically by the time social services have managed to convince the police involved the opportunity to possibly secure statements etc has been lost. This is getting much much better though in recent years, which is hopefully slightly reassuring.

Although there's always been various bits of law that could have dealt with abuse there was a criminal offence of 'wilful neglect' of a person lacking capacity reinforced in the Mental Capacity Act in 2005. This was then extended following the Winterbourne View and Mid staffs abuse into the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 which criminalised 'wilful neglect and ill treatment' of any vulnerable adults not just those who lacked capacity.

Convictions for wilful neglect/ Ill treatment remain extremely low. Mainly because in those kind of environments it's so hard to prove beyond reasonable doubt for a criminal conviction as often the users of the service are not deemed reliable witnesses, and it's rare there are independent eye witnesses.

Families, police and social services and the CQC can be pretty certain that something happened but unless there's enough evidence that the CPS will consider taking it to trial there's not a lot anyone can do other than refer individuals to a barred list and continue to monitor or close down the organisations involved as appropriate.

Winterbourne View made the news because there was undercover video footage which then made it 'public interest' and also meant there was a much higher chance of there being convictions.

I follow NAS on facebook as i worked for them for 5 years. This is the first i have heard of this, I'm horrified this has happened and in how they have handled it PR wise. This would never had happened in the setting that i worked, other would not have allowed it. There are some really evil sick people out there that like to exert their perceived 'power' over those more vulnerable. Its disgusting. We saw many people come and go that were not cut out for the role of support worker, they had only taken the job because they needed to pay the bills. Not the right people for the job at all, the right people wouldn't dream of hurting those they support.

So basically because nothing hit the headlines or social media for the duration of the investigation there was no 'public interest' angle?
It may not have been 'in the interest of the public' to prosecute but what about the interest of the 6 residents involved, do they not deserve justice?
Just because the money was returned to them does that make it ok to have financially abused these vulnerable people? Presumably it was the NAS who paid the money back not the individuals involved in the abuse.

Abuse is almost never prosecuted. My son was left with bruises by on care worker punching him and punched in the face by another. It gets investigated by police but no-one is ever prosecuted. These were observed and reported by other staff so it’s nothing to do with capacity or the person with LD’s having to give information. My son is non-verbal and couldn’t give evidence.

Unexplained bruising is left unexplained. Worrying staff reports are ignored by safeguarding because they have so many referrals unless the report is a police matter -I.e. involves clear physical abuse or theft it just gets filed. The CQC ignores reports (& can do little anyway as they have zero powers of investigation).

And no one gives a shit. Read Justice for LB if you want to know how difficult it is to get anyone to give a monkeys.

No I was meaning it's not bigger in the news (public interest) because showing a picture of the outside of the building which is about all the media has doesn't get as much media mileage as being able to show actual footage of vulnerable people screaming trapped under a chair. As sick as it is that's the nature of a 24 hour news cycle.

The CPS do tend to take these kind of cases very seriously if they get that far. But without enough evidence to convince them there is a realistic chance of criminal conviction they often determine its not in the public interest (i.e use public money) to chase what they feel will be a fruitless prosecution.

It will have been NAS that paid the money back yes. I suspect there will be many other organisations also hurriedly reviewing their policies on how staff meals on trips out are paid for as a result of this as well.

The full report is shocking. I just cannot fathom he th NAS suspended tfor perpetrators rather than sacking them. I really cannot get my head round that. I will never have anything to do with them again. Devastating

The other is you send staff on safeguarding courses, repeatedly, drum into them what abuse looks like - and they do their bit and report when they see something concerning (which involves reporting colleagues and potentially friends- not easy) and then they are ignored The most worrying safeguarding in my son’s case (wasn’t the punches - I know what happened there, pretty straightforward) was completely ignored for 3 months until I found out about it (!). I had to insist it is investigated (finally happening 5 months after the report - which is way too late). I just hope the investigation does uncover what happened. It may be nothing - but I think I would have been more confident in that outcome had the investigation been immediately after the report.

Alma - employers can only legally suspend while investigations are taking place. Even if someone is found to have (for example) punched someone the company HR then still has to have enough evidence to sack them. Unbelievably it doesn’t always follow on (& I have no idea what happens with a DBS is someone is found to have done something but isn’t prosecuted).

Devilish what you say is pretty much correct sadly. Except people do give a shit at ground level I promise.

It's just that there's isn't always much individuals can do it about it. It takes a multi-agency, multi professional approach and due to lack of funds every service and profession is retreating back into their individual professional silos and drawing very narrow boundaries around what they will do.

It also may seem like stuff is just being filed, because to a certain extent it is unless something immediately triggers a criminal threshold. But that doesn't mean that it's not on someone's radar and that an investigation isn't imminent.

Realistically though there are extremely small numbers of safeguarding workers having to sift through 1000s of reports a week trying to determine what's urgent and what will have to wait. Sometimes it takes a while for a pattern of concerns to build up to the extent where it shows a systematic problem rather than isolated 'unexplained' incidents.

do the LAs refuse to fund these places?
when I was looking at homes I had to rule one out as it had a bad care report. sw told me LA would not fund a place at a home with a bad one.

Don't worry, if someone is found to have done something but isn't prosecuted they will be referred to vetting and barring (DBS) by either their previous employer or social services and it will stay on their record.

Social services have mandatory reporting on this to make sure that it happens where appropriate.

Yep hatgirl - but the time taken for patterns to show can lead to unnecessary abuse and the entrenchment of a rotten culture.

Samcro - commissioners etc do try and avoid places they are uneasy about however, care companies are being bought up at a rate of knots by large corporate hedge funded providers who may have so many services they effectively have commissioners over a barrel. It becomes hard to commissioners to avoid the provider (albeit they may be able to stay away from a service) because they are so large.

Scope for example have just sold all their homes to a large profit driven enterprise. Their press release bangs on about looking for a company with a fantastic track record (I paraphrase). The company they have sold to has been in business less than a year!!

There is some sort of issue (which I don’t quite understand) peculiar to the U.K. market where there is a lot of money to be made for hedge funds etc via procurement of public funds. Meanwhile small care companies are struggling to survive because the amounts LAs/CCGs will pay is now so low.

There is something morally repugnant about the whole thing.

I am however immensely grateful that my CCG will not commission St Andrew’s www.theartsdesk.com/tv/dispatches-under-lock-and-key-channel-4

And that isn’t necessarily easy (to not commission them) as they have so many beds.

So because the Financial Abuse amounted to £10,000 pounds and the residents got their money back it wasn't worth the prosecution cost? after all there had to have been enough evidence of Financial Abuse for the NAS to have reimbursed the victims.

Develish I'm sorry to read of the abuse your son received at the hands of care workers.

SCOPE is awful. they have just sold the day centre dd used to use. what do they actually do to help people with CP now?

we do have to remember that there are good care homes out there. I find it sad that the bad ones have a negative impact on them. my dd is in a good one and very well looked after(yesterday I actually had to tell them off, they were letting her get her own way too much!!)

There is something morally repugnant about the whole thing

Absolutely. It's inherently wrong that companies should be profiting from the state via vulnerable, elderly and disabled people. They shouldn't be a commodity to be traded.

Very few agencies/companies manage to make a substantial profit on local authority rates without significantly compromising the quality of care. It's an open secret and something a decent society should be appalled at. The good agencies are usually the small local ones with fewer overheads but increasingly local authorities can't commission with them because of costs and economies of scale.

Sadly people just don't know about it until it directly impact on them or their family.

Yeah scope shut a school with limited warning here. They arrived in BMW’s and sharp suits to explain to the parents that they had no money.

My son was in a great care home - they were taken over and he was served with very limited notice (under a month, initially under 2 weeks). Now sectioned 8 hours from home as a care package couldn’t be put together in time. He hadn’t been away from me for more than 2 days before the sectioning. God knows what he thinks about where I have gone.

It must vary by area. I work st ground level with adults with LDs and have reported safeguarding issues to LA on occasion. I found them to be very responsive, returning calls promptly and following up, actually coming out to speak to the person involved and feeding back with actions taken etc.

Devilishpyjamas that must be so hard

Absolutely hatgirl - that’s pretty much the conversation I had with the CQC.

We have an amazing small provider lined up for when Ds1 returns. They really look after their staff as well (SO important). Unfortunately there seems to be no housing so unless we can get together a deposit for the HOLD scheme I can see him stuck under section at the opposite end of the country until 2019 (or longer). The hospital aren’t trying to hold onto him at all (my fear when he was admitted). The LA/CCG seem completely unable to source suitable housing.

I’m pleased it happens somewhere Rino.
Mind you when I spoke to the CQC recently the inspector said they knew my LA was way behind in safeguarding.