Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/8570
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorStanley, D-
dc.contributor.authorPenhale, B-
dc.contributor.authorGilhooly, M-
dc.date.accessioned2014-06-19T09:43:11Z-
dc.date.available2014-06-19T09:43:11Z-
dc.date.issued2013-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Adult Protection, 15(3), 153 - 163, 2013en_US
dc.identifier.issn1466-8203-
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=17091183en
dc.identifier.urihttp://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/8570-
dc.descriptionThis article is (c) Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear here (http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/8570). Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.en_US
dc.description.abstractPurpose – The purpose of this paper was to undertake a review of selected adult safeguarding policy and guidance documentation to establish the level of guidance provided in relation to financial abuse; identify similarities and differences between the guidance given to professionals working in different contexts; and report gaps or inconsistencies in the guidance given. Design/methodology/approach – Qualitative documentary content analysis was undertaken to identify key issues and themes in documents selected from 25 local authorities in England. Findings – Little variation was found in the content of the documents, which were all heavily influenced by “No Secrets” guidance. The victim and perpetrator were largely invisible and there is no reference to the possible medium to long-term impact of abuse on individuals. There is no research evidence underpinning the use of the notion of “significant harm” when used in the context of adults. In addition, there is no means of comparing safeguarding decisions across different local authorities to evaluate consistency of decisions and outcomes. Research limitations/implications – The lack of any mechanisms to compare safeguarding decisions and outcomes across local authority areas is a serious limitation of the way safeguarding works. Also, the failure to address the aftercare and support of victims means they are left to manage the psycho-social consequences. Practical implications – Safeguarding boards should evaluate the outcomes of interventions in a standardised way to enable comparison. They should also do more to ensure the longer-term wellbeing of victims. Social implications – The paper raises awareness of elder financial abuse. Originality/value – This is the only policy review that focuses specifically on financial abuse.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipEconomic and Social Research Council.en_US
dc.languageEnglish-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherEmerald Group Publishing Ltden_US
dc.subjectBankingen_US
dc.subjectElder careen_US
dc.subjectElder financial abuseen_US
dc.subjectHealthen_US
dc.subjectSafeguarding policyen_US
dc.subjectSocial careen_US
dc.titleElder abuse in England: A policy analysis perspective related to social care and bankingen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JAP-11-2012-0026-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/Brunel Active Staff-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/Brunel Active Staff/School of Health Sciences & Social Care-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/Brunel Active Staff/School of Health Sciences & Social Care/Health-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/University Research Centres and Groups-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/University Research Centres and Groups/School of Health Sciences and Social Care - URCs and Groups-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/University Research Centres and Groups/School of Health Sciences and Social Care - URCs and Groups/Brunel Institute for Ageing Studies-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/University Research Centres and Groups/School of Health Sciences and Social Care - URCs and Groups/Centre for Public Health Research-
Appears in Collections:Social Work
Community Health and Public Health
Dept of Health Sciences Research Papers

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Fulltext.pdf372.39 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in BURA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.