Online Exploitation, Grooming and Coercion Risks in Adult Social Care
Online exploitation and grooming are no longer risks limited to children and young people. Within Digital Safeguarding, Online Risk & Technology-Enabled Harm, adult social care providers increasingly support people exposed to coercion, manipulation and abuse through digital platforms. These risks must be understood and addressed through robust Digital Care Planning that links safeguarding, capacity, consent and day-to-day delivery practice.
This article explores how providers identify exploitation risks, respond proportionately, and evidence defensible safeguarding practice.
Why adult online exploitation is often missed
Online exploitation of adults is frequently misunderstood or under-recognised because it does not always involve physical contact or immediate harm. Indicators can be subtle and may present as behavioural change rather than clear incidents.
Common barriers to recognition include assumptions about adult autonomy, lack of staff confidence in digital risk assessment, and over-reliance on families to manage concerns.
Common forms of online exploitation in adult care
Providers report a growing range of exploitation patterns, including:
- Romance scams and emotional manipulation
- Financial coercion through repeated small transfers
- Pressure to share images or personal information
- Threats or blackmail following online contact
- Targeting of loneliness, grief or social isolation
Each requires a tailored safeguarding response rather than generic restriction.
Operational example 1: Romance exploitation targeting social isolation
Context: A person receiving domiciliary care developed an intense online relationship with an individual claiming to offer emotional support. Over time, requests for money escalated.
Support approach: The provider focused on understanding emotional drivers, not simply blocking contact. The safeguarding response addressed loneliness, social connection and vulnerability.
Day-to-day delivery detail: Keyworkers increased engagement around social routines, introduced structured activities and supported the person to recognise manipulation tactics. Digital safeguards included spending alerts and supported review of messages, agreed with the person. Staff were briefed through supervision to maintain consistent responses.
How effectiveness is evidenced: Financial losses stopped, wellbeing indicators improved, and safeguarding reviews showed the person remained digitally connected without further exploitation.
Commissioner expectation
Commissioners expect providers to identify and manage exploitation risks proactively, demonstrating that safeguarding responses reduce harm while supporting emotional wellbeing and independence.
Regulator / Inspector expectation
Inspectors expect providers to recognise non-physical abuse, including coercion and exploitation, and to evidence proportionate safeguarding action rather than blanket restrictions.
Assessing coercion and undue influence
Effective assessment goes beyond asking whether the person agrees to online contact. Providers should explore:
- Power imbalance and emotional dependency
- Fear of consequences if contact stops
- Consistency of decision-making over time
- Impact on finances, routines and mental health
This assessment should be reviewed regularly as circumstances and relationships evolve.
Operational example 2: Image-sharing pressure and online threats
Context: A person supported in extra care housing disclosed that someone online was pressuring them to send images and threatening to share earlier content.
Support approach: The provider prioritised safety, dignity and trust, ensuring the person did not feel blamed or punished.
Day-to-day delivery detail: Staff supported the person to report and block the contact, liaised with safeguarding partners, and introduced temporary digital monitoring with clear boundaries. Emotional support was built into daily routines, and the plan included advocacy involvement.
How effectiveness is evidenced: Threats ceased, confidence increased, and review records showed safeguards were reduced once risks stabilised.
Embedding safeguarding into daily delivery
Safeguarding against exploitation must be visible in everyday practice, not only in incident responses. This includes:
- Regular wellbeing conversations that include digital life
- Staff confidence to ask about online relationships
- Clear escalation routes when concerns emerge
- Supervision that reinforces consistent, non-judgemental responses
Operational example 3: Coercion linked to gambling apps
Context: A person with fluctuating mental health was encouraged online to place bets on behalf of others, creating financial and legal risk.
Support approach: The provider combined financial safeguarding with mental health support.
Day-to-day delivery detail: Staff supported app controls, spending caps and banking safeguards, alongside wellbeing monitoring. Digital access was not removed, but specific risk points were managed. Staff documented triggers and early warning signs.
How effectiveness is evidenced: Financial risk reduced, anxiety levels stabilised, and audits showed proportionate safeguards aligned to individual risk.
What good looks like
Good practice recognises online exploitation as a safeguarding priority in adult social care. Providers that respond well combine emotional understanding, proportionate digital safeguards and clear governance, enabling people to remain connected while protected.