At Amber, we view the potentially aggressive person as having a specific set of needs that have been shaped by their unique circumstances. Consequently, we view aggression as a maladaptive, but understandable, individual response to these circumstances.

Amber views aggression and risk management interventions, therefore, as inherently respecting the individual’s vulnerabilities, rather than penalizing their challenging behavior.

Our supporting ethical framework for the use of aggression and risk management interventions is covered in depth in many of our consultancy and training provisions, but in summary can be outlined as follows:

• The principles of ‘duty’ and ‘rights’ are central, and this includes the duties and rights of staff members, service-users or organizations, and of course our own at Amber.
• Promoting a clear understanding for participants that there is a range, or ‘hierarchy’, of aggression and risk management interventions, and that these are different for different individuals and circumstances.
• Utilising aggression and risk management interventions only when absolutely necessary, and in proportion, to the level of risk.
• When interventions are necessary, that these will always aim for no harm to occur to service-users.
• All aggression and risk management interventions are always an act of care.

Furthermore, we understand that where aggression and risk is concerned, and where there are vulnerable service-users and staff members involved in the management of conflict, organizations often require an in-depth understanding of the complex legal framework that surrounds their specific area. For instance, dependent on your specialist needs, we may cover one or more of the following legal areas within your training or consultancy provision:

• Children Act 1989
• Children Act 1989 Guidance and Regulations Volume 4:Residential Care (1991) London: HMSO
• Department of Health (1993) Guide on Permissible Forms of Control in Children’s Residential Care, London: Department of Health
• Department of Health (1993): Permissible Forms of Control in Children’s Residential Care: Interpretation of the Children Act 1989 (LAC (93) 13). Department of Health: London
• European Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 37(b); Beijing Rules, 13 and 9
• Mental Health Act 1983
• Mental Health Act (1983) Code of Practice, Department of Health and Welsh Office, London: The Stationery Office (1999)
• Department for Education and Employment (1998|) Circular 10/98 ‘Section 550A Education Act 1996: The Use of Force to Control or Restrain Pupils’, London: HMSO
• Human Rights Act 1998: Click Here
• Health and Safety at Work (etc) Act (1974)