Doctors' thinking about the system as a threat to patient safety

‘Systems thinking’ is an important feature of the emerging ‘patient safety’ agenda. As a key component of a ‘safety culture’, it encourages clinicians to look past individual error to recognise the latent factors that threaten safety. This paper investigates whether current medical thinking is commensurate with the idea of ‘systems thinking’ together with its implications for policy. The findings are based on qualitative semistructured interviews with specialist physicians working within one NHS District General Hospital in the English Midlands. It is shown that, rather then favouring a 'person-centred’ perspective, doctors readily identify ‘the system’ as a threat to patient safety. This is not necessarily a reflection of the prevailing safety discourse or knowledge of policy, but reflects a tacit understanding of how services are (dis)organised. This line of thinking serves to mitigate individual wrong-doing and protect professional credibility by encouraging doctors to accept and accommodate the shortcomings of the system, rather than participate in new forms of organisational learning.

Independence or Protection - does it have to be a choice? Reflections on the abuse people with learning disabilities in Cornwall

This commentary will use recent events in Cornwall to highlight the ongoing abuse of adults with learning disabilities in England. It will critically explore how two parallel policy agendas – namely, the promotion of choice and independence for adults with learning disabilities and the development of adult protection policies – have failed to connect, thus allowing abuse to continue to flourish. It will be argued that the abuse of people with learning disabilities can only be minimised by policies which reflect an understanding that choice and independence must necessarily be mediated by effective adult protection measures. Such protection needs to include not only an appropriate regulatory framework, access to justice and well-qualified staff, but also a more critical and reflective approach to the current orthodoxy which promotes choice and independence as the only acceptable goals for any person with a learning disability.