Care Practice Assessment Answers

• Type Assignment
• Downloads540
• Pages11
• Words2826

Describe and explain how to balance rights and risks in making decisions

Justice between rights and risks is always core to solutions that inform care provision processes of people with multiple needs such as the woman with a learning disability, TFE3, and nocturnal epilepsy in the given case study. For students seeking help writing assignments on balancing care rights and risks, this case provides practical examples. In this regard, it is crucial to work very closely because of her many concerns regarding her rights based on autonomy, dignity as well as independence, and various risks regarding her health. This balance is critical in helping her to live her life to the fullest together with having measures put in place to protect herself. This is based on some ethical considerations, legalities, and consensus that have to be made by the individual, caregivers, relatives, and other professionals. One of the concepts for handling rights and risks is a person-centred approach which states that every person has the right to choose his or her life (Brennan, Murphy & McCallion, 2024). The woman has the right to participate in her care, medical choices, and the choice of services that are likely to support her needs. However she has learning disabilities that may limit her ability to grasp risks, and she suffers from nocturnal epilepsy, which makes the reasoning process more complicated. For example, she may wish to live independently or engage in activities that have attached risks. The idea is to understand that although it is necessary to accept them as her decisions, one should consider certain risks and try to avoid dangerous scenarios. This implies the need for open speech and cooperation, proper decision-making, and a well-structuring of what she wants to tell her so she can get an idea of what might happen next. Returning to the evaluation process, it is necessary to say that risk assessment occupies an important position in it. Responsible careerists and health providers must always consider various dangers about her status but at the same time, let her be as independent as possible. For instance, if she has a desire to sleep without monitoring devices, it is important to determine the probability of a seizure during nighttime and its outcome. The compromise in such instances can be made by offering her a different one like a seizure alarm which can be used with the assistance of the caregivers without violating her privacy (Brown & Wilson, 2020). Likewise, if she wishes to engage in community activities certain factors, which include, supervision, access to areas, and action plans in incidences of an event or an emergency should be taken into consideration. It is to avoid risks but to look for 'reasonable ways of managing the risks and at the same time protecting her rights. One of the most pertinent issues of rights and risks comes when an individual makes a decision, that infringes on their safety. Capacity check tools, which fully correspond with legal requirements stipulated in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 in the United Kingdom, depict how she can make decisions or not. This is because in case she is assumed to possess capacity, her decision should not be denied even if it comes with some risk. Nevertheless, if she is not capable of appreciating the dangers involved, a best-interest standard has to be observed. This process entails seeking consent from the family members, legal representatives, and other health care practitioners to arrive at a decision making that would greatly cater to her best interests in the past and the present times. The role of the family members and advocates, therefore, is very important in trying to strike the right balance. They give an understanding of what may feel right for her, and what she has gone through and may be feeling emotionally, all without saying a word. For instance, if she wants to engage in an activity that would lead to a seizure, her family and caregivers must find a way of altering the activity so that it does not cause one. This could be done by arranging the activity at a time when she doesn't get the severities, confirming if there will be a professional staff with her, or if any other medical assistance is required. Thus, when two stakeholders are working together, then there is every possibility of protecting her rights besides reducing negative impacts on her(Carter, 2021).

Care Practice Assessment Answers

Liked This Answer? Hire Me Now

Michael Brown 7 Years | MSc

Compare and contrast two models of practice

Person Centred Planning or PCP and Getting It Right for Every Child or GIRFEC are two different models of work in the field of social care to help a person reach his or her optimum potential. Hence the two are related in that they both can be defined as the administration of something in the interest of the well-being of an individual, though the two are more separated by the difference in their approach and use.

Person-centred Planning (PCP) is the model that has a human being as the focal point of planning. It is apt for disabled patients, including learning disability patients as well as epilepsy, which acknowledges the importance of their choices, interests, and amounts. PCP affirms that the client-centred care and support plan is made dependent on the preference of the person and not on the readymade services. Consequently, it can involve the involvement of the individual, family members, and caregivers to develop a comprehensive approach that fosters independence, weighs the value of personal dignity, and promotes an individual’s right to self-determination(Davies & Jones, 2019).

The GIRFEC framework that has been adopted by the Scottish government, helps focus on a child or young person’s wellbeing; however, it can be used for an adult with a learning disability. It has a conceptual framework through the SHANARRI well-being indicators including Safe, Healthy, Achieving, Nurtured, Active, Respected, Responsible, and Included. What they are doing now is that they combine efforts from different agencies since they understand, for instance, through GIRFEC, what is being practiced is a collaboration of the service delivery. While PCP is carried out through a dialogue wherein some of the questions are directly answered by an individual, GIRFEC includes regular and systematic checks and the overview by the professionals to make sure all aspects are not neglected(Evans & Carter, 2022).

Such comparable aspects of the two models are the unity of concepts and involvement of other individuals, and the purpose of enhancing the patient’s quality of life. These two models trigger respect for diversity as well as foster equal customer treatment and promote customers’ capacities. The primary issue is that the organizational structure of PCP is loose and personal whereas GIRFEC has a more bureaucratic, multi-professional structure based on several assessment tools.

Describe and evaluate two methods of delivering the objectives of the care plan

Task-centred Practice (TCP) is a short-term, goal-orientated approach to the management of patients preferring to work to time-limited goals set during a nominated session. It is goal-driven and concentrates on helping learners to solve tasks hence appropriate to disabled persons, who need structured steps to learn and become independent. In the case of the woman mentioned in the case scenario, TCP can assist her in realistic daily living skills for example, meal preparation, hygiene, or a schedule that would prevent her from experiencing another seizure. In her case, because she has learning disabilities, one can suggest that more guidance to her and different actions and activities be broken down into manageable steps so that she would gain confidence the independence in achieving them. Mental health workers would involve her in developing strategies for tackling these challenges, and how to implement them, and track progress frequently. For example, if she fails to comply with her epilepsy medication, TCP could try to use such things as objects stickers, and other practices to build a routine for the girl(Green & Roberts, 2023). The usefulness of TCP comes from the fact gives implementable tangible evaluation methods that can assist the individual and not overburden them. However, one disadvantage is that it entails the patient’s willingness and energy, which may be a problem if the lady has a low learning disability.

Behavioural Support in turn is concerned with the intervention intended to change human behaviour in the interest of enhancing the quality of life of an individual. This system is especially beneficial to people with anxiety, anger, or behavioural concerns because of their disability. In dealing with anxiety related to the woman’s epilepsy, behavioural support could be of great help in promoting positive coping strategies. This is because she may feel distressed about the seizures or limitations arising from her condition thus means that reinforcement strategies visual supports and structural routines would make her feel secure. For instance, if she demonstrates distress before to bed as a result of the fear of nocturnal seizure, explain and practice proper ways to calm the nerves before bed, as well as ensure that she is informed of several safety features that are available during the night such as seizure alarms could help. This also entails teaching the caregivers and the members of her family on proper ways of responding to her needs hence encouraging positive behaviour. The strength of behavioural support is the fact that it is long-term oriented due to teaching the actual coping mechanisms that positively affect the person’s emotions(Harris & Williams, 2020).

Hence, between the two approaches, the behavioural support model will be most effective for this particular individual since it also addresses the participation, emotion, and psychology of the case. Where TCP aids in building particular modes of functioning, behavioural support makes sure that she stays emotionally secure and capable of processing the day ahead without any anxieties. Her care plan goals may in all probability entail confidence, lessening of anxiety, and structure among others, which behavioural support caters for comprehensively.

Describe and evaluate 2 examples of risk enablement plan

Risk management is critical in using traditional justification in supporting an individual’s right to equal access to services while taking equal risk as any other person especially the disabled. Two examples of risk enablement that adhere to the human rights of the woman with learning disabilities, TFE3, and nocturnal epilepsy while fostering her welfare and protection include the following;

1. Supported Independent Living: Arranging her to do something that she might find difficult to do on her own for example preparing food or bathing will enable her to exercise her right to lead her own life. Although she has a learning disability, these should be contained by practicing with supervision, using utensils such as a safety kettle, and setting down routines. It helps her to gain confidence, increase well-being, and experience social inclusion with the least detrimental effects.
2. Preferred Care Plan: Engaging the woman in community activity despite her having nocturnal epilepsy respects her rights. With a good risk management strategy, she can wear a medical alert bracelet, use seizure alarms, and educate her caregivers on how to manage the situations to avert an attack, meaning that she could be out as often as she wants without limitations. It is doing it to ensure that she is alright, while at the same time, trying to respect her rights and independence(Johnson & Smith, 2021).

A reflective account

Description

As a participative member in this role, I worked with the team to devise the care plan that would ensure the individual’s rights were respected enhancing her dignity and promoting independence besides containment of the risks as depicted in her case. I had to involve her and the advocates as they emphasized that the patient’s care should be data-driven. While encouraging the idea of independence for the child, it became necessary to keep health and safety measures, especially for epilepsy and learning disabilities(McCausland et al., 2021).

Feelings

Initially, this was a great concern for me and mainly the challenge of striking a balance between risk and independence. I wanted to protect her right to be independent but at the same time, I realized that she still needed some protection. I feared that excessive precaution could prevent her from enjoying her newfound independence while lenient security measures could expose her to danger. Nevertheless, the knowledge meeting with colleagues and training helped me to strengthen my confidence in the use of the person-centred approach and take into account ethics and professional responsibility(Ryan et al., 2024).

Evaluation

The case also revealed key values of social care such as dignity, respect for the individual, inclusion, and equality as well as enabling. Thus, the care plan ensured that she was an active participant in the decisions to be made to avoid giving her a feeling that she had no control over what was happening to her. In another way, she tried to involve the advocates and her family to make sure the authorities listened to her as well. Of the described care plan, one of the most beneficial features of use was Risk Enablement. As for the specific risks associated with epilepsy, we engaged seizure alarms and taught caregivers together with establishing a certain number of routines to reduce the risk associated with the disease while at the same time not depriving her of her rights. Thus, it was possible to maintain the balance between safety and autonomy. However, I also found out that bureaucratic barriers are likely to work against person-centred values at times. For instance, the policies on matters concerning health and safety restricted some flexibility in implementation. Although such restrictions are necessary, they led me to doubt whether systems in place exist for the well-being of the individual(Smith & Brown, 2019).

Analysis

The situation proved the importance of human rights and principles of social care closer to me. The Human Rights Act 1998 and the Health and Social Care Standards of the UK also focus on the patient’s right to choose, autonomy, and respect. The code of ethics and the law set the pace, especially in the development of the care that formed the care plan because it was personally developed and not generic. Lastly, the kind of upbringing I had exercised an influence on the care that was provided to the elderly. Thus, the individual was raised to accept all people and their rights, as was I, and uphold the rights of the individual. It is also worth noting down what I took for granted: for example, I was quick to understand what should be good for a certain person simply failing to listen to him/her. In this way, I also changed for the better when it comes to listening and more importantly coming up with decisions together(White & Thompson, 2023).

Conclusion

In this reflection, I was able to realize that values, rights, and principles should be incorporated into the development, implementation, and assessment of the care plan. It enabled me to understand that, however important it is to write and discuss the policies and risk assessments, a person should be at the centre and have their rights protected. It also evidenced that accurate self-awareness when dealing with patients is important so as not to betray patient’s prejudice.

Action Plan

Moving forward, I will:

• Person-centred training should go on to build my capacity for the assessment of rights and risks.
• Explain the pro-risk positions related to self-determination theory within the context of safety.
• Be mindful of my assumptions by thinking of them often so that I do not impose them on the care planning process.
• This requires engaging in more dialogs with the service users and their advocacy bodies to enhance individualized service delivery.

References

• Brennan, D., Murphy, R. and McCallion, P., 2024. Person-Centred Planning and Community Participation for Adults with Intellectual Disabilities. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 37(2), pp.123-134.
• Brown, M. and Wilson, L., 2020. Risk Enablement in Social Care: Balancing Rights and Responsibilities. Health and Social Care in the Community, 28(5), pp.1456-1464.
• Carter, S., 2021. The Role of Counselling Skills in Supporting Individuals with Learning Disabilities. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 49(3), pp.278-285.
• Davies, H. and Jones, P., 2019. Implementing Task-Centred Practice in Disability Services. Social Work in Health Care, 58(7), pp.654-667.
• Evans, R. and Carter, M., 2022. Behavioural Support Strategies for Individuals with Learning Disabilities and Epilepsy. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 47(1), pp.45-58.
• Green, T. and Roberts, A., 2023. Ethical Considerations in Risk Enablement for People with Disabilities. Ethics and Social Welfare, 17(1), pp.89-102.
• Harris, D. and Williams, J., 2020. Person-Centred Planning: A Review of Approaches and Effectiveness. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 17(4), pp.266-276.
• Johnson, P. and Smith, L., 2021. The Impact of Person-Centred Planning on Community Integration. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities, 25(2), pp.234-247.
• McCausland, D., Murphy, E., McCallion, P. and McCarron, M., 2021. The potential for person-centred planning to support the community participation of adults with an intellectual disability. Journal of Long-Term Care, (2021), pp.144–156.
• Ryan, S., Wallace, L., Tilley, E., Tuffrey-Wijne, I., Mikulak, M. and Anderson, R., 2024. Improving support and planning ahead for older people with learning disabilities and family carers: a mixed-methods study. Health and Social Care Delivery Research, 12(16).
• Smith, G. and Brown, E., 2019. Counselling Approaches in Supporting Adults with Learning Disabilities. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 19(2), pp.231-239.
• White, R. and Thompson, S., 2023. Evaluating Task-Centred Practice in Learning Disability Services. Journal of Social Work Practice, 37(1), pp.77-90.