A carer has been sanctioned by the industry regulator after leaving a service user living with autism and a learning disability in a filthy bed after they soiled themselves.
Adam McNaughton failed to carry out complete personal care for the supported person on two occasions while working for West Park Supported Living at Inspired Independent Living in Kilmarnock.
Two Incidents of Neglect
According to the regulator, the Scottish Social Services Council (SSSC), on or around 14 October 2025, McNaughton failed to carry out complete personal care when the supported person - referred to as 'AA' - was incontinent of faeces and urine. McNaughton then failed to carry out complete personal care of 'AA' on or around 31 October 2025, when 'AA' was also incontinent of faeces and urine.
In their decision notice, the SSSC said McNaughton's fitness to practise was "impaired" due to misconduct and placed a warning on his continued registration for a period of three years.
Regulator's Findings
The decision notice stated: "Social services workers are expected to meet relevant standards of practice and work in a lawful, safe and effective way. They must not abuse, neglect or harm the individuals they support and should respect and maintain their dignity and privacy."
It added: "On two occasions you (McNaughton) failed to support 'AA' after he had been incontinent of faeces and urine in bed. Your actions were neglectful and meant that 'AA' was left lying in a dirty, wet bed until the staff member coming on shift came in. You placed 'AA' at risk of physical harm through infection and emotional harm through neglect. This behaviour falls far below the standard expected of a trusted social care worker."
McNaughton's Response
According to McNaughton, he maintained that on the first occasion 'AA' had not had a bowel movement but he was wet. He changed the sheet but "forgot" to change his pyjamas. McNaughton provided a similar account of the second incident but reported that immediately after it he "changed his practice" to be more "attentive."
The SSSC said: "You (McNaughton) report to being overtired but acknowledge that is not an excuse. You have demonstrated some regret and remorse for the impact of your actions on 'AA's health and wellbeing."
Prior Record and Sanction
Papers show that, prior to the incidents, McNaughton held registration for six years with "no reported concerns." Since the incidents came to light, McNaughton had continued to work in the sector "without issue" and his current employer "provided a good reference."
However, the SSSC deemed McNaughton's behaviour "serious," saying: "Personal care is a fundamental part of social care and a basic human need. 'AA' relied on staff to prompt him to use the bathroom and assist him to do the things he cannot do for himself. Your actions left him in an unsafe and undignified state, when he was unable to communicate."
In placing a warning on McNaughton's registration, the SSSC added: "The risk of the behaviour being repeated is fairly low but the consequences of your actions for a vulnerable person are so serious that action must be taken."
