Helping Ahmed

What was the person’s situation before working with Advocacy Focus?

Ahmed* is a 33 year old male who has a diagnosis of Autism. Ahmed was living at a shared property with two other residents and had a twenty four hour package of care.

The staff that supported Ahmed had noticed that he was struggling to cope with sharing his home with the other residents as he was becoming increasingly anxious at their presence and appeared to be unhappy when his housemates were near him.

Ahmed had begun isolating himself and spending an increasing amount of time in his bedroom. It was therefore felt that it may be in Ahmed’s best interests to have a property of his own.

How we helped

As Ahmed had no friends or family a referral was made to Advocacy Focus for an Independent Advocate. The Advocate visited Ahmed in his property and made attempts to speak with him about the decision and ensure he was included wherever possible.

As it was difficult to ascertain Ahmed’s views verbally, the Advocate spent time observing Ahmed in his home and could see that he was anxious around the other residents he lived with. The Advocate submitted a report to the decision maker highlighting their findings and stating the views they had gained from Ahmed about the decision being made. It was decided that it would be in Ahmed’s best interests to move to a property with a single tenancy.

Ahmed moved to his new house a short time later and the difference in his presentation could be seen almost immediately. Ahmed appeared far more settled and was spending much more time in communal areas and engaging in activities.

Due to the nature of Ahmed’s illness it was necessary for a number of restrictions to be in place to ensure that Ahmed was safe in the property. With this in mind, Ahmed’s social worker made an application to the Court of Protection prior to the move to request that a Deprivation of Liberty Order be put in place to authorise the restrictions that would be imposed on Ahmed.

Once again Ahmed had no one appropriate to support him in ensuring his views and wishes were upheld throughout the court process. The court was able to identify the Independent Advocate from Advocacy Focus as the best placed person to represent Ahmed.

What was the outcome?

The judge appointed the Advocate as Rule 1.2 Representative (Rep) for Ahmed and they went to visit him again in his new home. The Advocate spent time speaking with staff about Ahmed’s daily presentation and questioned the purpose of the restrictions in place to ensure they were the least restrictive option.

The Advocate also spoke with Ahmed and read through his daily observation records to ensure they had a full picture of his views on the placement. Once the visit was completed the Advocate submitted a witness statement to the court which reflected their involvement and detailed their views on whether or not the restrictions were necessary and whether Ahmed was happy with them.

Why was advocacy support so effective?

The Deprivation of Liberty Order was granted and the Advocate continued to visit Ahmed every three months as a 1.2 Rep to ensure that any changes were identified and that no further restrictions were imposed.

To find out more about how a Rule 1.2 Representative can help, click here

*Names have been changed to protect the identity of the people we support