SOCIAL care failed a woman who was murdered in Troon in 2016 but her family can take comfort in their contribution to ensure future families don’t go through the same.

A Significant Case Review into the death of 46-year-old Sharon Greenop found that the decision to close her care package was “flawed” and allowed the circumstances to develop which led to her death.

Speaking after the presentation, independant Chair of the South Ayrshire Adult Protection Committee Professor Paul Martin said: “I think the family can take comfort through their engagement and their involvement in the review process. Sharon’s sister was involved in the review process. Their engagement has helped the recommendations.

“The report is frank and to the point and I think that is really helpful and I think they can take some comfort in the fact that the partnership has moved already to make those recommendations and seek to minimise the risk of anything like this happening to any other family.

“It’s absolutely tragic for Sharon’s family and we need to recognise that, and an apology and an action plan and making changes to services I hope at some point was able to help make them move on with their lives.”

Ayr Advertiser:

Prior to her death, Sharon received a community care package from social work services within the South Ayrshire Health and Social Care Partnership. This care package was later closed but it was found that it was one case of hundreds that were not met by a mandatory annual review.

This, along with other points were noted as “failings” which prevented an appropriate intervention from the social work body and could have prevented her abuse and eventual death.

Sharon was murdered by her sister Lynette Greenop who was sentenced to a minimum of 23 years in prison last year. The High Court Court in Glasgow found Sharon had been victim of abuse and neglect.

The report also noted that record-keeping was extremely poor and hampered by outdated information systems, meaning there was insufficient information about Sharon’s care and wellbeing and it was difficult to manage her case effectively. Now, her family’s involvement in the more rigorous plans for the partnership should be respected moving forward.

Professor Martin added: “It is my responsibility and the responsibility of the partnership to make sure that we honour that involvement by pursuing the recommendations of the report and making sure they are implemented.”

Speaking on some of the changes, Professor Martin said: “At the time care packages were not being reviewed as timelessly as they could and should have been and there were a number of care packages that were beyond the annual review period. The report identifies 373. In Sharon’s case, her package was closed at the request of the family, confirmed by Sharon through a telephone call and there was no face-to-face discussion or a follow-up to make sure that the care package or the care then delivered by the family through her sister was then delivering Sharon’s needs. There was no follow-up review.

“In the new system, the care packages will be reviewed annually and they will be reviewed through the named care worker that review will be overseen by a team leader or a senior social worker and the request is made for a care package to be closed. And it will only be closed once the service user has been visited, and the social work team has confirmed that that is the appropriate action.

“The benefit of the annual review is even when something is going along very well as most care packages will be, there is a defined point in time when a conversation happens about ‘is this working for you?’ .”