Safeguarding means 'protecting people's health, wellbeing and human rights, and enabling them to live free from harm, abuse and neglect'. Protecting their rights to live in safety, free from abuse and neglect. People and organisations working together to prevent the risk of abuse or neglect, and to stop them from happening. Making sure people's wellbeing is promoted, taking their views, wishes, feelings and beliefs into account. The above is taken from the CQC definition but I think this is what is meant by safeguarding, where do people feel that H&S fits. This may only apply to H&S practitioners in the field. My own feelings are that because it has 'safe' in the title then managers and carers believe it sits with H&S, but is this true? isn't it that H&S might be part of it but a bigger emphasis should be given to the care planning, as the feelings of the people concerned needs to be taken into account. The reason I am asking is that increasingly I am finding that once we are told of an issue everyone else leaves it alone, and when I ask what other measures are in place they tell me well we passed it over to you!

Morning, Safeguarding sits with H&S in the same way HR and Quality do. i.e. they don't. They are different, but with crossover. They are largely personal issues, not necessarily affected by work. A care setting, is where the lines are most blurred, but to simply pass on safeguarding issues to H&S or HR are not adequately dealing with them. All staff dealing with children or vulnerable adults should be aware of safeguarding and have undergone at least some rudimentary training. However, a designated safeguarding team needs to be established, this is an addition to job roles in the same vein as say, a first aider. This would have a designated lead with a number of designated officers depending on the spread and size of the workforce and number of vulnerable people. They would undergo more specialist training and meet regularly as a team to support one another.

If the organisation needs PVG clearance for most or all its staff, then someone will already be named responsible for obtaining and acting on the reports received.... That someone might be the h&s person, or it may be the hr manager, or it may be the home manager or.... I believe that safeguarding sits wherever it is put, which should be with whoever is best placed to understand, organise, plan, monitor and review the necessary measures. See what I did there?

But if you want to prevent them being able to move around freely 'service users' that is you have to apply for a DOL first (Deprivation of Liberty). So up until that point you have to take their views into account.

Invictus - You cannot deprive a persons liberty (or restrict their freedom) if they have capacity, unless they are committing a crime. It a person does not have capacity you would not take their views into account. That is why the courts will decide if a DoLs order will be issued or not and not the person. For example, when a person is being restrained to keep them and others safe, it is often against their wishes. Point's to note: There are different rules for adults and children. DoLs does not apply in Scotland.

In every care organisation I've been involved in or know about safeguarding is always managed and implemented by clinicians and or social workers. In our forthcoming incident reporting system I, as head of health and safety and the 'owner' of the system won't even see safeguarding incidents. And I'm very happy with that. On the rare occasions when there is a link with H&S I will be informed, but usually there isn't and I won't be. Tigers; don't talk to me about PREVENT. I think INCENSE or INFLAME might be a better term for this misguided and misinformed initiative. My partner has had to endure it, and sat through a whole day of a highly paid and gravely misinformed 'expert' waffling on about things she knew not wot of. And when I was in Northern Ireland discussing this I was told that 'every teenager in NI is at risk of radicalisation'. Though perhaps not in the limited sense the term is used by the Sun and the Home Office, John

Starting at the beginning the definition I use is A vulnerable adult is defined as: ‘any person 18 years or over, who is, or may be in need of community care services by reason of mental, physical or learning disability, age or illness and is, or may be, unable to take care of him or herself or unable to protect him or herself against significant harm or exploitation (Dept. of Health “No Secrets (2000)”. Looking at this one can see an H&S crossover into systems run by others. Bear in mind we are probably more experienced in RA than many other professions