I am writing to express concerns in regard to the revisions to the Adult protective Services Regulation, 22VAC40-740.  My concerns relate to the sections pertaining to notifications of alleged “perpetrators” and the right of “perpetrators” to request a review of the local agency’s investigative findings.  The proposed regulation mistakenly implies the APS assessment is a criminal or punitive process.

            From the APS Manual:  “Protective services to adults include the receipt and investigation of reports of abuse, neglect, or exploitation of adults, as well as reports that adults are at risk of abuse, neglect, or exploitation. Protective services also include the following:

• Assessing service needs.

• Determining whether the subject of the report is in need of protective services.

• Documenting the need for protective services.

• Specifying what services are needed.

• Providing or arranging for service delivery.”

            Each of the aforementioned items is adult-centered.  Adult-focused has been the nature of the Adult Protective Services program.  With the “perpetrator” language we bring about a new dimension to the APS worker.  There is a move from an agency of assistance to an agency of discipline.  Many times, the APS worker forges a bond with the adult, which facilitates their ability to assist with services.  If the adult realizes we have accused their favorite caretaker of wrongdoing, the door to that adult may close forever.

            The other issue at hand is the deluge of time-sensitive requirements which will increase the workload of the APS worker.  In a majority of our cases, the perpetrator is the adult themselves.  Will this policy require we go through this process with the adult?  If that is the case, what is the purpose? 

            While I understand the intent to increase an individual’s “due process,” I also see the potential for negative and unintended consequences.