CHCLEG001- Dignity of Risk

[s.sweeny]

Hi everyone,

I was hoping for some help on a question on one of my assignments.
The question is:
Explain the term ‘Dignity of Risk’ and discuss what can happen if a service breaches this?
My answer so far is:
"The concept of ‘dignity of risk’ arises from the key principles of the Disability Services Act. It refers to the rights of an individual regarding; learning new skills, experiencing all life offers and taking part of an activity that may contain elements of some risk. Providing benefits that may lead to the gain of independence and self-esteem. Workers are expected to cautious and sensible to take reasonable care in their work, however they are not expected to shield from all possible risks.

Educators have a responsible for guiding the child in gaining a strong sense of identity, by allowing, encouraging and supporting the child to make safe decisions. Strategies that are put in place around the child’s dignity of risk, gives the child an opportunity to, be open and communicate with the educator, giving them the chance to guide the child to have a say in their play.

Laws are put in place to protect both the service provider and the consumer. If educators and/or service providers do not follow the law then there maybe penalties enforced. Penalties are varied according to which law is broken but other laws also may be impacted by the decision of the penalty."


I was wondering if breaching dignity of risk is breaching Article 12 of the the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, as children are not allowed to have there say?

[Lorina]

Yes, you're on the right track with your response!

,
Lorina

[Lorina]

Dignity of risk

Associated with duty of care is the concept of dignity of risk. Dignity of risk refers to a person’s right to experience all that life has to offer, such as learning a new skill or taking part in an activity that may entail some element of risk, but has benefits that might include gaining greater self esteem and independence.
Most people with disabilities wish to lead lives which are as close as possible to that of people who do not have a disability and this inevitably involves taking some risks. Courts and the law of negligence do not, therefore, expect disability workers to shield their clients from all possible risks. They do, however, expect workers to take reasonable care (to be sensible and cautious) in their work.

This concept arises out of the key principles of the Disability Services Act. For example ‘People with disabilities have the same rights as other members of Australian society to realise their individual capacities for physical, social, emotional and intellectual development’ (Parsons, 1997). It can, however, pose concerns and dilemmas for staff. Value clashes between clients and workers also can play a role here as well.

Ref: Duty Of Care

,
Lorina

[s.sweeny]

Thanks for the reply!
I have just read through the ref to Duty of Care you attached and plan to add this to what I had written.

Laws are put in place to protect both the service provider and the consumer. If educators and/or service providers do not follow the law then there maybe penalties enforced. Penalties are varied according to which law is broken but other laws also may be impacted by the decision of the penalty.
Dignity of Risk is associated with Duty of Care, which when breached falls under negligence. Negligence is a common law and brought before a judge, with each case heard individually. The verdict is based on the circumstance and relevant information as there are (4) principles towards guilt (or innocence) rather than a specific definition for the term.

If a child expresses that they would like to participate in an activity involving manageable risk and you continue to prevent the child’s involvement, you may be in breach of ‘When adults are making decisions that affect children, children have the right to say what they think should happen and have their opinions taken into account’ – Article 12 of the United Nations Convention in the Rights of the Child.
This breach may result in formal proceedings consisting of five steps. In the order of preparation; the hearing; assessment of the capacity of the child; information of the weight given to the views of the child (feedback); complaints, remedies and redress.


Would this be a sufficient response to the question or am I still missing an element?
Thanks again for the reply, this question has had me stumped for the past week.

[Lorina]

No, I think what you have written is fine!

,
Lorina

[s.sweeny]

Thank you, I appreciate the help!

[Lorina]

You're welcome!

,
Lorina