|Appears in Collections:||Faculty of Social Sciences Journal Articles|
|Peer Review Status:||Refereed|
|Title:||Implications of divergences in Adult Protection Legislation|
|Keywords:||Adult at risk|
|Citation:||Montgomery L, Anand J, Mackay K, Taylor B, Pearson K & Harper C (2016) Implications of divergences in Adult Protection Legislation. Journal of Adult Protection, 18 (3), pp. 149-160. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAP-10-2015-0032|
|Abstract:||Purpose -This study explores the similarities and differences of legal responses to older adults who may be at risk of harm or abuse in the UK, Ireland, Australia and the United States (US). Design -The authors draw upon a review of elder abuse and adult protection undertaken on behalf of the Commissioner for Older People in Northern Ireland. This paper focuses on the desk top mapping of the different legal approaches and draws upon wider literature to frame the discussion of the relative strengths and weaknesses of the different legal responses. Findings- Arguments exist both for and against each legal approach. Differences in defining the scope and powers of Adult Protection Legislation in the UK and internationally are highlighted. Limitations-This review was undertaken in late 2013; whilst the authors have updated the mapping to take account of subsequent changes, some statutory guidance is not yet available. Whilst the expertise of a group of experienced professionals in the field of adult safeguarding was utilised, it was not feasible to employ a formal survey or consensus model. Practical implications- Some countries have already introduced APL and others are considering doing so. The potential advantages and challenges of introducing APL are highlighted. Social implications -The introduction of legislation may give professionals increased powers to prevent and reduce abuse of adults, but this would also change the dynamic of relationships within families and between families and professionals. Originality- This paper’s provides an accessible discussion of APL across the UK and internationally which to date has been lacking from the literature.|
|Rights:||This item has been embargoed for a period. During the embargo please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study. Publisher policy allows this work to be made available in this repository. To be published in Journal of Adult Protection by Emerald. The original publication is available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/JAP-10-2015-0032. This article is deposited under the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial International Licence 4.0 (CC BY-NC 4.0). Any reuse is allowed in accordance with the terms outlined by the licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). To reuse the AAM for commercial purposes, permission should be sought by contacting firstname.lastname@example.org.|
|2016 JAP Divergences_in_legislation_accepted version for submission.pdf||Fulltext - Accepted Version||339.9 kB||Adobe PDF||View/Open|
This item is protected by original copyright
A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License
Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact email@example.com providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.