There are several key organisations that exist to protect people’s rights with regards to the Mental Capacity Act and its application. These include the Care Quality Commission (CQC), Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) and Court of Protection (COP). However, while each of these bodies has an important role to play, we should remember that it is every person’s responsibility to raise a concern if a suspected breach of the Act has taken place.
Serious incidents such as those at Winterbourne View Hospital and Whorlton Hall are sadly not a thing of the past. Warnings have been shared from various sources regarding the lack of appropriate support for adults with learning disabilities, leaving many locked away in contravention of their Human Rights.
From the 1st January 2023, there will be a new process for applications surrounding the Court of Protection property and affairs deputyship.
There have been a number of high-profile Court of Protection (CoP) cases this year on the subject of DoLS placement and provisions. These cases each raise questions around the least restrictive option for the individual, what classes as ‘best interest’, and what do we mean by proportionate, reasonable and justifiable care.
There are often many complex interactions between legislation and case law – especially in the field of mental capacity and the Mental Capacity Act (2005) specifically. For this reason it is vital for professionals working in this area to ensure they are familiar with updates in case law to ensure those within the system are protected and best practice is upheld.
A Relevant Person’s Representative (RPR) is an advocate assigned to a person who is under the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). They are assigned by the Supervisory Authority to ensure the individual’s voice is upheld and supported while deprivations are in place. This includes the responsibility to raise a review and then a challenge if the relevant person is objecting to their care, treatment and/or placement.
Over many years of professional practice I have come across a number cases where certain vulnerable individuals have found themselves unable to make a decision, most frequently when they are confronted with a ‘big decision’ of lasting consequence.
While in some cases it can be sensible to put off a decision until more information becomes available, this ‘decision paralysis’ can sometimes have lasting and quite damaging consequences. This is especially true where decision paralysis can lead to delays in treatment or reduce the quality of life of the individual while they mull over their decision.
Anyone can conduct a Mental Capacity Assessment. However, context is important, and a professional may be required for complex decisions. This will help ensure assessments are carried out in the correct manner, and that they are valid (i.e. reliable and trustworthy) in order to protect both the assessor, and the person being assessed.
There are several terms that are used to describe the process of determining a person’s mental capacity. Is it a Mental Capacity Test, or a Mental Capacity Assessment? In this blog, we explore some of the language around the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and how it applies in practice.
As the size of our retired population grows, and our social norms change, we are seeing an increasing demand for care and nursing homes to support those who are not able to have their needs met within the community.
These older adults – indeed many younger adults as well – may have come to these placements through shared decision-making, or through Best Interest decisions made on their behalf. Others may be in care settings as a part of discharge-to-assess models, respite, or as a step-down placement for rehabilitation prior to returning home.