Safeguarding Choice While Managing Risk

Implement supported decision-making, proportionate safeguards and transparent review.

There may be a tendency for professionals to take away all risk after an incident and this can be done by restricting options or implementing rules that persist beyond the immediate incident.

The protective reaction can restrict autonomy without solving the problem. A purely ‘hands off' response can lack awareness of foreseeable harm.

Why this matters for social workers

Social workers provide the “how” and the “why” to arrangements that might otherwise be task based. The challenge is to make that understanding a reality, without compromising privacy, dignity and self-determination. Useful coordination links the person's story to the person's current preferences, barriers and support needs, and then clearly identifies the next responsibility, and does not assume that any one professional owns all the problems.

What better coordination looks like

Good safeguarding considers the risk as specific; considers what the person understands and prefers; and takes the least restrictive, practicable option.

Define the risk

Describe what happened, the likelihood, the consequence and the context.

Support the decision

Give accessible information, time and trusted help so the person can understand their options and express preferences.

Review the safeguard

Establish a timeframe, outcome and review date so temporary controls do not become permanent by default.

Make the change last

A good change is specific and small enough to practise and small enough to review. Decide who will take the first step, and where and when the decision will be written down and who will be asked whether it helped. Where the approach relies on multiple services, make sure each party is ready to play their part, and confirm this independently, not as part of a meeting. Keep what works, change what doesn't and eliminate temporary fixes that are no longer useful for the desired results.

Questions for the next review

From the person's perspective, what would defining the risk look like?

What is certain and what is not?

What easily observable change will indicate to the person and team that this is working?

Keep the boundary clear

Safeguarding duties, legal responsibilities and planned interventions still apply. If there is a concern relating to capacity, coercion, abuse or restrictive practice, social workers should seek specialist or legal advice.

A practical example

Following a community incident, a service proposed ending independent outings. A review confirmed that the issue was a new route. The person selected travel training and a check-in plan, leaving the goal intact, but with specific safeguarding measures in place.