News

CASE STUDY:

The names of all service users  mentioned in this article have been changed.

Situation: Sandra Meadows, 88, lives with her second husband, Ken, 79, in a ground floor council flat. They married three years ago. Ken is a recovering alcoholic. Sandra has also recently become mildly confused and attends a day centre (without Ken) twice a week.

Problem:  At her day centre, Sandra broke down in tears and told her keyworker that Ken had been hitting, grabbing and hurting her. There was extensive bruising on her arms and wrists. The day services manager called the duty social worker who turned up to meet Sandra in the company of her keyworker and the centre manager. Sandra kept saying that she did not want to make a fuss and that Ken lashed out or grabbed her only occasionally. It was usually following any time that Ken managed to get himself a drink - although he was supposed to be on an abstinence programme. Sandra said that she did not need any hospital or medical input and simply wanted to go home as usual at the end of the day. The social worker suggested that she could take her home and perhaps meet with Ken and carry out an assessment. Sandra said Ken must not find out  or she could be in "big bother". She also said that nobody should confront Ken because he  can be very aggressive and Sandra did not  want that to happen.

Panel Responses

Mick Ryan

This case falls within the remit of adult protection. Sandra is a vulnerable adult by virtue of her being in need of community care services and has made a disclosure of physical harm inflicted on her by her husband.

In view of Sandra's subsequent statement that "she does not want to make a fuss" any further action needs to be handled sensitively. Sandra is worried and frightened by the consequences of Ken being confronted with his alleged actions, but she was distressed enough to feel the need to disclose. Her anxiety about consequences is understandable and not unusual in these circumstances. Reassurance that she has done the right thing is essential.

Capacity to consent may be an issue due to Sandra's mild confusion. It is also a care issue that needs further exploration and psychiatric assessment. An immediate assessment of mental health is unlikely on the day, but information from previous assessments may shed light on capacity and also provide further background.

These checks are important as they may indicate previous concerns about Ken's aggression. It seems unlikely, if Ken is aggressive when drinking, that this is a new phenomenon. The fact that he is on an "abstinence programme" may indicate professionals are already involved with him. Their views could be sought.

Ultimately, Sandra could refuse to allow further investigation, but this seems unlikely. Her immediate safety is important and this issue needs to be discussed with her. She does not need to return home and could be provided with emergency accommodation. Another option could be family members (if there are any) who might take on Sandra temporarily.

Any home visit should have Sandra's agreement and she should be reassured that she does not have to remain at home if she is too frightened.

It would appear that Ken has been trying to control his drinking but this remains an open question. He may be in drink on Sandra's return in which case any meaningful discussion with him about what has happened may not be possible. In these circumstances it would be prudent to offer Sandra alternative accommodation.

Jackie Dawson

The importance of multidisciplinary working is reinforced in Sandra's situation. Although the co-ordinator would be a social worker, if this were my case my role would be reporting and documenting any concerns I had about Sandra's condition. These would be reported to the designated key social worker and also to the GP.

I could be involved if Sandra developed wounds or skin damage. Establishing a good rapport and enabling Sandra to trust the district nursing team would be a priority. However, should either I or my team members observe any bruising or other injuries we would openly discuss our concerns with Sandra. However, even if she requested that these concerns were not shared with other professionals, I would explain that, should Sandra's personal safety and well-being be at risk, I would have to disclose this information.

Any wounds would be recorded on a wound tracing (a manual way of measuring the wound) and, with consent, photographs might be taken. Should Sandra disclose her concerns during a visit, a referral would be made to the duty social worker.

All information from the visit would be documented in the nursing notes. To maintain confidentiality as the nursing notes are left in the home, a second set of notes would be made to ensure no sensitive information was read by a third party. Furthermore, a nursing incident form would be completed and senior nursing management would be informed. Additionally, owing to Ken's behaviour, district nurses would ideally visit Sandra at the day centre.

Another concern that I would seek to address is the report of Sandra having mild confusion. After discussion with the GP, I would undertake a test to rule out a urine infection which could be the cause. Sandra may require a referral to the community mental health team. An assessment from the team may involve attendance at the memory clinic.

Communication - both verbal and written - between each professional would be a crucial factor in ensuring Sandra's situation is monitored closely. Regular case conferences with attendance from each professional involved would enable the situation to be continuously reviewed.

User View 

This problem may not be as straightforward at it first seems, write members of Knowsley Older People's Voice. Was Sandra attending the day centre before she became confused or has she started attending the day centre because of her confusion?

Sandra's safety is paramount. The day centre manager and her keyworker need to try to persuade Sandra to let the social worker go home with her.

The first issue to be raised is consent. If Sandra does not want anyone to approach Ken her wishes must be respected and she should not be overruled.

Is Ken's abstinence programme with a voluntary support organisation or is it with health or social care? If it is with health or social care, Ken will also have a keyworker assigned to him.

An urgent case conference should be called with keyworkers for Sandra and Ken. The social worker should contact the lead for the vulnerable adults procedure, and the vulnerable adults team needs to be involved at the case conference. The needs of Sandra and Ken have altered and they should both be reassessed for new care packages.

We only have Sandra's version of what is happening at home. In her confusion, she may be hitting out at Ken and he may have to restrain her. It is probable that she would have no memory of this. Or Ken may be trying to help her with daily activities of life: for example, washing, feeding, help to the toilet; and Sandra, in her confusion, is resisting, thinking he is trying to hurt her.

After the case conference, Sandra should have a full health check with her GP. Both Sandra and Ken should have annual checks routinely, as they are both older than 75.

Has the cause of the confusion been established? Sometimes infections can cause people to become confused. Also, medication can cause personality changes so this should be reviewed urgently. Once these avenues are ruled out, Sandra's GP could refer her to the community mental health team.

Both Sandra and Ken should have a benefits health check as they may not be claiming benefits that they are entitled to.

There is no mention of any family for either Sandra or Ken. Some enquiries should be made to see if there are any relatives living close by.

We do not know if Sandra or Ken are churchgoers or have any religious beliefs. There may be links in the community to offer support to them.

Knowsley Older People's Voice is an older people's forum based in Knowsley, Merseyside.