The Social Care Act 2014 Essay

Section 3 is entitled ‘A personalised Adult Social Care System’ and in subsection 3.3 it discusses ‘Systems which act on and minimise the risk of abuse and neglect of vulnerable adults, supported by a network of “champions”, including volunteers and professionals, promoting dignity in local care services.’. This is yet more important policy and guidance which focuses on policy developments in relation to the Safeguarding of vulnerable adults. Although at City Care Partnership we haven’t adopted the system of champions, it’s something that could be given future consideration as we look to improve our own systems. We do have something similar in the form of an organisational Safeguarding lead however, a

The NHS and Community Care Act 1990 promotes the right to be cared for in a way that meets their needs and takes account of choices because it provides care that is tailored to the needs of people through an assessment. A detailed care

| * Identified the minimum levels of care a vulnerable adult should be given in care homes

Care Act 2014- Came into effect in April 2015 and is the most important reform in care in over 60 years. The Care Act brings together and modernises existing legislation and should also help the public to understand why things happen in a certain way. The Act main aims are to put people in control of their own care, to delay or even prevent the need for care, to promote the physical, mental and emotional wellbeing of the person and their carer and to introduce a fairer system of care and support.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) is considered to be one of the most radical health care moves in legislation after Medicare. The reason being that it will provide universal health coverage to everyone regardless of circumstance. An evaluation of ACA’s influence on health care will be evaluated in this paper.

Legislation forms a framework which all care homes must adhere to; this is carried out in many guises and includes many parliamentary acts such as human rights act 1998 and the mental health act 1993, these acts are designed to protect and promote rights and responsibilities of people within a care setting. There are also provisions under other acts to protect and ensure rights to specific group’s equal pay, sex discrimination, race relations and disability discrimination.

To what extent should the Affordable Care Act “Obama Care”, be the responsibility of the Federal government, and not the burden of the state under the guidelines of Federalism?

President Barack Obama signed the Affordable Care Act, into law on March 23rd 2010. Congress had tried for decades to pass health care reform, beginning with President Franklin Roosevelt. Finally, President Obama pushed this Act into law with the Democrat control, and gave the federal government 16% of the United States economy. The law states that every American citizen is mandated to purchase health insurance. In 2014, if the consumer elects to ignore the law, and not purchase health insurance the consumer will be penalized in the amount of $95.00 or 1% of their income. In 2016, the penalty rate will be much higher in the amount of 2.5% of the

In 2010 Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act which is a piece of reform designed to greatly to expand health care access. Since the Teddy Roosevelt administration there have been ideas on how to provide universal healthcare or a healthcare reform. It was then seen in Henry Truman’s campain where he used it as a platform in 1948 for the Democratic Party. Following that in the 1960’s you have major reforms that were created that we now know of as Medicare or Medicaid which are kind of socialism type of programs that are guaranteeing some type of health insurance for people with low income and also elderly and retirees. Yet even with those types of forms for the overall population in the 21st century the U.S still had

The Children Act 1989 and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC; United Nations Charter for the Rights of Children 1989) and the Children and Families Act 2014 have driven a theoretical and policy shift in the attitudes and understandings of children’s involvement in the services relevant to them (Goodyer, 2012; Simpson, 2015). Goodley, (2012 p394) argues children’s rights under the UNCRC are based on the three premises of rights: the rights to protection, provision and participation. This distinction can contribute to the ways in which welfare provision in England operates different models, simultaneously creating tensions between parallel provisions. The child development model underpinning the current child and family practice enables the provision and protection aspects of children’s right to be addressed. Child and family social work has been extremely preoccupied with providing children with a safe and protected childhood, with looked-after children being deemed a low priority in the participation, design, delivery and monitoring of their services (Goodyer, 2012). According to Cocker and Allian (2012 p36) “the philosophy of the Children Act 1989 is that the best place for children to be brought up is within their own family, and that children in need can be helped most effectively if the local authority – working in partnership with parents – provides an

As the ageing population and the demand for social care provision increases (ARK, 2010), the demand for informal caregiving is becoming an important concern for researchers and policy-makers. The 2011 consensus of Northern Ireland carried out by Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency indicates that out of a population of 1.8 million there are 213,980 informal carers in Northern Ireland, this figure is higher than any other UK jurisdiction; informal care includes looking after fail, ill or disabled family members, friends or partners (NIHRC, 2014). Research undertaken by the University of Leeds found that the economic value of unpaid care in Northern Ireland is at £4.4 billion (NIHRC, 2014). However care can no longer be taken for granted and this notion of the ‘care gap’ has been highlighted due to key demographic, epidemiological and social changes (Hodgkin, 2014). These changes that challenge the informal care system are the ageing population, changes in the family structure and the entry of women in the labour market (Hodgkin, 2014). In addition to demographic changes, there has been a significant body of research with growing interest in the concern for informal caregiver’s social, financial and emotional wellbeing (Hodgkin, 2014). Research findings suggest burnout and the heavy burden on families may lead to aggressive behaviors towards the elderly and even physical and mental abuse (ARK, 2010). The caregiver burden refers to the multi-dimensional challenges of

As the most radical piece of legislation, Care Act 2014 consolidated and updated ineffective policies to ensure adults in need are better supported. The act contains several core purposes; to protect and promote the wellbeing and the rights of those at risk of harm and abuse, bring clarity to the concept of safeguarding, and transform the

We as social care workers need to safe guard vulnerable people. When it comes to safe guarding there are laws that protect individual people under the Children’s Act 1989 it states It shall be the general duty of every local authority in addition to the other duties imposed on them by this Part to safeguard and promote the welfare of children within their area who are in need; and, so far as is consistent with that duty, to promote the upbringing of such children by their families - by providing a range and level of services appropriate to those children's needs.( www.legislation.gov.uk).

Private funding allocates more choices for older people and their family to directly purchase in the care market while enhance their financial burden. For example, Lewis and West (2014) argue burden on family are increasing during the marketisation of care process. Along with financial supports from the state, direct purchasing contributes to the increasing employment of care workers at home. For example, since cash-for-care scheme allows older people and their family to look for cheaper care services, migrant workers is increasingly providing care services to older people in Italy (Shutes and Chiatti, 2012).As Glendinning (2012) illustrated with the case in England, ‘public sector funding constraints’ and ‘extensive marketisation’ have promoted the growing public home care services and private funding supply.

Similarly, advocates of direct payments in line with personal budgets argue that they can achieve a wide range of policy objectives such as better outcomes for social care users (Poll et al. 2006), greater empowerment of recipients, thereby conferring more dignity and personal responsibility (Hatton et al. 2008). Those against have argued that the use of direct payments to encourage personalisation of care, as well as encouraging service users to become more independent and autonomous, is a government ploy to absolve itself of responsibility toward its citizens (Woolham et al 2015). In Ferguson (2007) is also of the view that the personalisation agenda represents not so much an extension of choice as a privatisation of risk due to the way it shifts responsibility away from the state and on to individuals with social care needs and their unpaid carers.