2.4 Identify the consequences for individuals of a service-focused approach to risk assessment

This guide will help you answer 2.4 Identify the consequences for individuals of a service-focused approach to risk assessment.

Adopting a service-focused approach to risk assessment can influence the lives of individuals in various ways. This method prioritises the demands or goals of the service provider over the unique needs and preferences of the individual. While it is often used to manage organisational operations effectively, it may have implications for the autonomy, dignity, and overall wellbeing of the people receiving care.

This guide covers some of the consequences for individuals subjected to a service-focused approach.

Loss of Personal Autonomy

Personal autonomy is the right of individuals to make decisions about their lives. A service-focused approach can overlook this by tailoring risk assessments to meet organisational objectives, rather than prioritising the individual’s preferences. This may result in rigid rules or blanket policies applied across all service users.

For example:

• Restricting an older person from accessing a community garden for “safety reasons” without considering their desire for independence and connection to nature.
• Limiting independent outings for individuals with learning disabilities to reduce risks, even though it greatly affects their social interaction and quality of life.

This lack of flexibility disregards the unique capabilities and aspirations of individuals, making them feel powerless or ignored.

Impact on Dignity and Self-Worth

Feeling respected and valued is critical to maintaining a sense of dignity. A risk assessment strategy that focuses on service convenience can unintentionally expose people to practices that undermine their dignity.

Examples may include:

• Applying unnecessary restrictions simply for ease of service management.
• Treating all individuals under the same precautionary measures, regardless of their individual risk levels.

Such approaches can lead individuals to feel marginalised or unimportant, potentially harming their self-esteem and mental health.

Increased Dependence

A service-focused risk assessment might discourage individuals from retaining their independence. For instance, care providers may insist on doing tasks for an individual to minimise perceived risks, rather than supporting them to try these tasks themselves.

This can lead to:

• Loss of skills the person once had.
• Increased dependence on care services.
• Reduced confidence in their ability to manage their own lives.

For example, a young adult with a physical disability might be fully capable of cooking under supervision, but a service-focused policy may prohibit this activity for convenience. Over time, the individual might lose the ability or motivation to cook altogether.

Reduced Quality of Life

Quality of life is about more than just physical safety—it includes emotional, social, and psychological wellbeing. A service-focused approach may prioritise physical safety at the expense of other essential aspects of life.

For instance:

• Limiting recreational activities for fear of injury, leaving individuals feeling isolated and bored.
• Ignoring cultural, spiritual, or personal preferences when designing care plans.

By sidelining these aspects, individuals risk becoming demotivated, withdrawn, or even depressed.

Lowered Trust in Services

Risk assessments that heavily reflect the service’s priorities over those of the user can erode trust. Individuals may feel that their voices are not being heard or that such assessments are not genuinely made in their best interest.

This lack of trust might result in:

• Reluctance to share personal information.
• Hesitation to engage fully with care services.
• Strained relationships between service users and providers.

Over-Prioritisation of Legal and Financial Concerns

A service-focused approach often prioritises safeguarding the organisation from legal or financial liabilities. While this is important, an overemphasis may mean that individuals’ wellbeing takes a back seat.

Examples of this might include:

• Overly restrictive measures to avoid legal risks, such as preventing residents in a care home from having pets.
• Cutting corners on care provisions to reduce costs, impacting individuals’ overall wellbeing.

Such decisions can be seen by individuals as prioritising the interests of the organisation above those of the people it serves, leading to feelings of neglect.

Missed Opportunities for Positive Risk-Taking

Positive risk-taking means allowing individuals to engage in activities that carry some risk, but which also offer personal growth, fulfilment, or happiness. A service-focused approach often leans toward avoiding any form of risk, no matter how small.

Examples might include:

• Discouraging someone with mobility issues from learning to use public transport.
• Preventing people with mental health challenges from engaging in employment.

Missed opportunities for positive risk-taking can hamper personal development, reduce confidence, and create an overly cautious lifestyle. Such an approach risks people becoming disengaged or feeling incapable of new achievements.

Negative Impact on Relationships

Comprehensive care involves not just the individual but their family and loved ones as well. A rigid, service-oriented framework for risk assessment might exclude families and support networks from the decision-making process.

This could lead to:

• Family members feeling excluded and undervalued in their loved one’s care.
• Strained relationships if individuals feel their preferences are not being considered.

Inclusion of families and friends is vital to crafting care plans that respect the individual’s full social and emotional context.

Delays in Adaptation to Individual Needs

Services that rely too heavily on a one-size-fits-all model often struggle to adapt to the specific needs of individuals. In some cases, this might lead to delays in providing suitable support.

For example:

• An individual requiring additional mobility aids might need to wait while the system processes their request.
• Someone with changing health needs might stick to the same outdated care plan because services are slow to reassess risk levels.

These delays can create frustration, discomfort, or harm for individuals depending on prompt care.

Over-Reliance on Policies and Protocols

Risk assessments in a service-focused approach often involve strict policies and protocols. While these are necessary, they may limit creative or flexible thinking.

This over-reliance can:

• Prevent personalised solutions.
• Demonstrate a lack of empathy in addressing unique requirements.
• Create a “tick-box culture” that prioritises bureaucracy over genuine care.

Individuals subjected to such inflexible systems may feel dehumanised or boxed into predefined categories that do not reflect their full identities.

Poor Emotional and Psychological Outcomes

Finally, the psychological toll of a service-focused risk assessment approach cannot be underestimated. The feeling of being treated as a number on a checklist, rather than a person with unique needs, can result in negative emotional outcomes.

Frequent consequences include:

• Increased anxiety from feeling over-controlled.
• A sense of hopelessness as decisions are made on their behalf without meaningful consultation.
• Frustration and anger at being excluded from discussions about their own lives.

Final Thoughts

Risk assessment is a critical element of health and social care. While safety and legal requirements must be upheld, it is important to strike a balance that does not sacrifice individual rights and preferences. A service-focused approach may serve operational goals well, but it risks commodifying care and overlooking the dignity, aspirations, and potential of those receiving support. By shifting towards a more person-centred approach, care services can better align with the needs and desires of individuals, improving their overall experience and wellbeing.