By Charlotte Webster
A social worker failed to respect the privacy and dignity of the eight service users concerned, while potentially unlawfully depriving them of their liberty, a tribunal has found.the social worker was employed by North Lincolnshire Council for a period of 25 years in Adult Services resigned in February 2018.
The offending social worker’s identity has been withheld because his misconduct is not deemed criminal or the sort that requires full exposure. The social worker failed to adhere to the guidelines contained in the Association of Directors Of Social Services. In 2016, the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services issued guidance on completing form 3s, which set out a number of general principles that BIAs should follow.
AD: Capeesh Restaurant
Among the guidelines was the requirement that all reports are professional, based on factual information and professional judgement. There should be professional ownership of the report by the BIA and other documents relied on should be clearly identified. The assessment is also required to be objective, concise and unambiguous.
”Where opinions, assumptions or ‘hearsay’ are recorded they should be clearly framed as such”, the guidelines said. Further, where information is being taken from previous assessments the source should be referenced (particularly relevant for reviews/renewals). Alarm was raised after an audit in April 2017 of other form 3s the practitioner had completed revealed the forms for eight service users were identical in various parts and were not all relevant to the individual service users.
The social worker’s offence was copying and pasting information used in other forms, and the details of the information did not accurately reflect the relevant service user’s actual circumstances and personal details. Identical responses recorded on several other forms the practitioner completed exposed the social worker as a fraud, though not of a criminal nature. The panel said it was “inconceivable that each individual would have answered and responded in exactly the same way”As a result, the social worker was suspended by the Council and five of the Service Users in question were re-assessed by a different BIA.
AD: Oysterian Sea Food Restaurant And Bar
When asked why he had copied parts of other Service User documentation onto the Forms he was required to complete the social worker explained that he had used a “stock template” which he then completed. He thought this was acceptable and that his main focus had been on the Capacity Assessment section of each form which involved him meeting the Service User and their family members.
The social worker conceded that his actions were unacceptable and that he recognised, by copying and pasting from other Forms, he had placed the Service Users at risk of harm. He emphasised there had been no financial or personal gain from his actions which he described as unprofessional, stupid, naïve and potentially put service users at risk of being unlawfully deprived of their liberty.
In all the circumstances the Panel concluded that ”in signing the Forms and completing
them as he did, the social worker must have been aware that the information for the
individual Service Users was wrong and incorrect at the time he prepared and signed
them. It continued:
”As a social worker and fully trained BIA it was his responsibility to ensure this was done properly and, in acting as he did, he failed in that responsibility. On that basis it concluded that an ordinary and decent person would consider such conduct to be dishonest and, accordingly, the objective part of the Ivey test was satisfied”.
#
A social worker failed to respect the privacy and dignity of the eight service users concerned, while potentially unlawfully depriving them of their liberty, a tribunal has found. In 2016, the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services issued guidance on completing form 3s, which set out a number of general principles that BIAs should follow.
Among the guidelines was the requirement that all reports are professional, based on factual information and professional judgement. There should be professional ownership of the report by the BIA and other documents relied on should be clearly identified. The assessment is also required to be objective, concise and unambiguous.
”Where opinions, assumptions or ‘hearsay’ are recorded they should be clearly framed as such”, the guidelines said. Further, where information is being taken from previous assessments the source should be referenced (particularly relevant for reviews/renewals). Alarm was raised after an audit in April 2017 of other form 3s the practitioner had completed revealed the forms for eight service users were identical in various parts and were not all relevant to the individual service users.
The social worker had copied and pasted information used in other forms and the details of the information did not accurately reflect the relevant service user’s actual circumstances and personal details. After identical responses were recorded on several other forms the practitioner completed. The panel said it was “inconceivable that each individual would have answered and responded in exactly the same way”
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar