“It’s all a bit wishy-washy”: practitioner perspectives on the use of the inherent jurisdiction in adult safeguarding

The Inherent Jurisdiction of the High Court can be used to safeguard vulnerable adults who are deemed to have mental capacity, but are seen as unable to exercise autonomous choices due to external forces such as constraint, coercion, undue influence or other vitiating factors. There are established concerns about how well the Inherent Jurisdiction is understood in safeguarding practice but existing literature does not address the perspectives of practitioners. In response, this article presents the findings of two related studies that explore how safeguarding practitioners in six local authorities understand, perceive and use the Inherent Jurisdiction. We gathered data through four knowledge exchange workshops in an initial study and through four interviews and four focus groups in a second study. Our findings show safeguarding practitioners were concerned about evidentiary requirements but also described organisational hesitancy to apply for orders. While practitioners identified practical, ethical and rights-based concerns, they also described risk management work outside of legal application, demonstrating a workforce grappling with significant risk and an obscure legal framework. Our recommendations propose enabling a better understanding of the Inherent Jurisdiction through training, protocols and practice guidance, but we also signal the importance of scoping reform in order to respond more effectively to safeguarding as it arises in everyday practice