News

My practice

Posted: 14 July 2005 | Subscribe Online


Despite the many inter-agency procedures that provide partnership and co-operation for everyone involved in the care of vulnerable adults, it can still prove hard to define issues around capacity to consent.

Julie-Ann Jones* is a 21-year-old young woman with a mild learning difficulty. She lives at home with her mother, Sarah,* and mother's partner, George.* Her mother has mental health difficulties.

Like anyone of her age, Julie-Ann enjoys going out. She attended our day service to engage in more meaningful activities than spending most of her time in local pubs. But her attendance became erratic, and her mood, appearance and anxiety levels all deteriorated. She often said her mother and George were taking her money. Her keyworker and the healthcare team kept a close eye on the situation, sensing something was not quite right.
Article continues below the advertisement



Then Julie-Ann called to say her mother had been admitted to hospital following an overdose, and that it was all her fault. During all the turmoil, Julie-Ann announced that her mother had overdosed after finding out about Julie-Ann sleeping with George.

Julie-Ann was found an emergency respite bed, and the vulnerable adult procedure evoked. A strategy meeting, which included police, social services and health, discovered that Julie-Ann received "payment" for sleeping with George, albeit just a packet of cigarettes or a meal out. Not once during her statement did she say that George had forced her to do it - in other words, she had consented to the act. The investigation went no further.

I managed to maintain her attendance at the day service to monitor how she was. Deep down I knew the situation would re-occur and was not sure that Julie-Ann understood what was happening to her.

Six months later, Julie-Ann disclosed that she was regularly sleeping with George for payment. The vulnerable adult route was taken again, and this time the police did a video interview to try and gain more evidence. Julie-Ann graphically described the acts that had taken place, but again did not say that she had said "No" or that any force had been used; as a result, she was considered to have consented and we sent her back home again.
Article continues below the advertisement



It leaves me feeling helpless and frustrated that Julie-Ann is being taken advantage of. Or is she? The family obviously think that this is the norm. My only hope is that one day Julie-Ann will realise she need not be in the situation she is and move on. In the meantime I have no doubt that the vulnerable adult procedure will be revisited for Julie-Ann.

* Names have been changed

Nichola Edge manages a day service in Staffordshire for people with learning difficulties


Spread the word:   bookmark it! diggit! reddit!



Products and Services
  • RSS Feeds
  • Conferences
  • Jobs By Email
  • News
  • Blogss
  • Videos
  • Magazine Subscriptions
  • Podcasts