Trips are off because of a couple of adults and what they did?

[girlfriend44]

I volunteer at a centre and we do trips out for centre users?

On the recent trip out a couple of the adults got in a strangers car and now the boss has said there are no more trips because of what they did? Is this harsh?
The adults that did this were Ok by the way?

Some vulnerable people in your care were in a strangers car and you dont think thats big deal?

If your kid was in a school trip and the teacher said "just a little incident, while we were looking round we realised little Johnny had wondered off and got in someone's car. No harm done!" Would you be OK with that?

No, it isn't harsh. As "couple of adults [who] got into a strangers car" are vulnerable adults, cancellation of future trips is to be expected.

You can't expect the charity to take vulnerable adults out on trips if this sort of thing happens.

Presume there will have to be an investigation or review before any such trips can be resumed. Everyone involved sounds like they could do with some additional training. Were there enough supervising adults on the trip in question?

Gently - if you don't understand this, then you're probably in need of safeguarding training or a refresher. Or perhaps volunteering with a charity that doesn't work with vulnerable adults would be a better fit.

Imagine if young children on a school trip had gone off by themselves and got in a stranger's car. You wouldn't be surprised that the school or nursery had trip privileges revoked, would you?

"I volunteer at a centre and we do trips out for centre users?" This is not a question

"On the recent trip..... no more trips because of what they did?" This is not a question

"Is this harsh?" Yay, an actual question. No, it is a perfectly reasonable and correct response.

"The adults that did this were Ok by the way?" This is also not a question.

Once you've worked out why it's bad that vulnerable people ended up getting into a stranger's car, can you please get some grammar lessons?

YABU to post such a vague thread leading to more questions than answers.

If there is no plan to assess what went wrong and whether there is a way to put safeguards in place, then that seems like an overly cautious response. But if the director has looked at what happened and realised it was because the center just can’t provide the resources needed to safeguard in those circumstances without compromising other things that the centre wants to prioritize then it’s appropriate.

I do think you’ve minimized the situation in your posts here and if your attitude is shared by even a few of the people who supervise the trips I can see why the centre might feel that they just don’t have the capacity to make things safe at this point.

It's really lazy management to just stop all trips instead of investigate and update the risk assessment with mitigation, policy and procedures etc and staff training if needed.

The manager is absolutely right. His main problem seems to be hiring staff who do not understand the safeguarding risks around vulnerable adults, like the OP.

Although the OP has said they are vulnerable adults this could be anything from severe learning disabilities and non-verbal to neurotypical, living independently with mental health issues. I think the level of independence these people have in their day to day lives is relevant, although of course mistakes were made either way and there should be a review and a new risk assessment before any future trips.

Trips shouldn’t b cancelled but the staff should be replaced.

I'm going to assume all trips are cancelled because carers didn't follow procedures and processes in place

So no, it's not harsh

Depends on-

1. Persons vulnerability
2. Persons MCA to keep themselves safe when out
3. If staff were there
4. If staff were there why weren't they doing their jobs?
5. What the users want going forward

Safeguarding Social Worker here. If it does need reporting to the local authority please give them more info than what you have posted. You can't ask people what they think of a scenario that has more info.

I’m inclined to believe that the OP may also be vulnerable in this situation too.

As a volunteer, I imagine she is under no contract with the centre or has much responsibility or authority.

Any adult who cannot accurately risk assess this situation probably does not have the capacity to be in a safeguarding/supervising position.

@girlfriend44 bless you. You sound naive and I think you're getting unfair rap on this thread. You've given your time to volunteer and quite clearly have not had appropriate training if you cannot recognise the safeguarding implications of this incident. Trips are not off to punish those vulnerable adults who got in the car, but because similar trips cannot be conducted safely. At least the manager of the small charity recognises they have some work to do on the safeguarding front.

If you can't see why it's essential the trips stop while the charity is incapable of keeping their service users safe, you haven't had enough training, OP.

It's not a harsh punishment, it's making sure others aren't also at risk of getting lost or going away with strangers.

YABU for not knowing how to use a full stop.

And for not understanding safeguarding.

Some vulnerable adults (yes the OP did come back to clarify that the adults that got into the strangers car were indeed vulnerable) got into a strangers car and you don't think there is anything wrong in that?

Do you mind me asking, as you volunteer with this group, what age bracket you fit into because your post comes across as naive and that you not understanding the safeguarding implications of something like this and this actually happening. This is a serious event and I can 100% understand why the organisers would want to put measures in place before any similar trips would be organised in the future.

I think maybe back off from criticising the OP a little, as he/she comes across as vulnerable themselves. Hopefully the manager will be offering appropriate support.

OP, in the kindest way , the fact you asked the question shows that the staff ( of which you are one )supervising these vulnerable adults havent got the expertise or training to manage this situation .
It is always difficult if support is voluntary, but this doesnt change the rights and safeguarding needs of these service users .
The manager would have no option but to stop the trips .

No, it is not harsh. It is safeguarding.

I'm actually thinking that this might be a reverse.
I'm guessing that the OP is not a volunteer but actually one of the adults and feels hard done by as their trips have been cancelled by what the OP perceives to be a slight because a couple of other adults did what they see as silly and not serious at all.

As others have said, the choice of language used implies that the op has not fully comprehended the seriousness of the situation. I would hope that, as a volunteer, she has had appropriate training for what she was required to do, but from experience, I wouldn't surprise if she had not.
Even though the majority of people wouldn't perhaps need certain things pointing out, not everyone is the same, hence the need for the presumed centre outing, therefore we shouldn't judge the op, and hope she is willing to listen to why this is many families nightmare scenario.

Not harsh at all.

I work in adult social care with vulnerable adults. I think your manager did the right thing. Sounds like there is a massive safeguarding fail, possibly more training needed before it's considered again.

Have you done a course on safeguarding at all?

I think people are being harsh when it’s possible the OP has learning difficulties herself.