I think it is a term that can be interpreted in many ways. If we are talking about risk involved, then sure, someone who is mbile but may be a 'high' risk of falls has the right to continue to mobilise if they are aware that risk is present. If they are not aware of their own risks, we have a duty to protect but not to restrain from normal meaningful activity. We do not have to restrain to prevent falls, we can use our investigative skills to see why residents are more mobile at certain times and to move obstacles out the way etc.
On the other hand, I have heard regulators say we cannot put a lap belt on a tilting chair of a resident who is severely demented and unable to walk as it is their right to fall. I find this ridiculous as the person cannot walk anyway so it is a foregone conclusion that they will not voluntarily get off their chair, so we are not taking away a right?
I think a lot of it goes down to the paperwork regulators push on us that categorises people into a high risk group or low risk group depending on various conditions. Sometimes we cannot prevent falls, sometimes we can, we just have to make sure our desire to 'help' someone does not inhibit their desire to 'act'.
I walk out my home, I trip and fall, I was not looking, is that my right to fall, I know there is a risk in anything I do that I migt have an accident???