Latest news stories and opinions about the Dental, GP and Care Industries. For your ease of use, we have established categories under which you can source the relevant articles and news items.
The Response so far
I wrote a blog earlier in the year after the Law Commission launched their proposals for what would hopefully be a simplified, but also more comprehensive process, for managing situations where people who lack capacity are deprived of their liberty. Well, the consultation period is nearly at an end and if you want to respond you’ve got until the 2nd November to do so. If you want to look at the proposals you can revisit my blog at http://www.ukqcs.co.uk/from-dols-to-providing-protective-care/. Meanwhile in this blog I wanted to see where the Commission are up to in their consultation.
Some of the issues that provoked discussion were some mixed views about how helpful the Cheshire West judgement was, with some respondents saying the new so-called acid test of what constitutes a deprivation of liberty doesn’t make sense. In addition the Commission heard of reports of care providers not understanding the way the Mental Capacity Act should work. Topically, respondents said the impact of the UN Disability Convention should be explored more widely in the proposals. More about that in a future blog.
Some of the proposals that received a positive response were as follows:
- The use of early safeguards under the umbrella of supportive care. There was support for the idea of a service user’s interests being protected by it being written into law that they have had proper assessment and care plans.
- Respondents liked the idea of simplifying the dilemma of whether we should use the Mental Health Act or the Mental Capacity Act to detain someone in hospital who was not objecting to being there.
- Respondents also approved of the idea of being able to consent in advance to being deprived of your liberty in certain circumstances.
Causes for concern
Things that people weren’t so keen on were as follows: There was concern about how deprivation of liberty in domestic settings would be managed. Who can monitor a situation in which families might be depriving a relative of their liberty in their own home?
- There was concern about how deprivation of liberty in domestic settings would be managed. Who can monitor a situation in which families might be depriving a relative of their liberty in their own home?
- People didn’t like the idea of a separate hospital scheme for depriving liberty of people in a general hospital.
- There was some concern that the proposal to extend safeguards to 16 and 17 year olds might cause conflict with existing children’s legislation.
- The new role of Approved Mental Capacity Professional felt as though it might cause confusion, and be weaker than the existing role of the Best Interest Assessors.
- Day care was not featured much in the proposals yet many respondents suggested there was a big issue of people being deprived of their liberty in day centres.
So what happens next? The responses will be considered by the Law Commission. They will then come back with new proposals together with draft legislation before the end of 2016. So a way to go yet en route to a better process for dealing with deprivation of liberty! I’ll keep you posted.
David Beckingham – QCS Expert Mental Health Contributor