Mental Capacity Act (MCA) Directory

Case law summary relating to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

This leaflet explains what it means to be on a standard DoLs and what are the rights of care home residents and hospital patients.

A quick guide to the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards, looking at the use of DoLS, the role of the Managing Authority, what to do when a deprivation of liberty is identified, what happens when an application is made, the roles of the Supervisory Body and the Relevant Persons Representatives, and what happens when an authorisation ends.

This presentation explains what deprivation of liberty is and sets out practical steps to avoid it occurring. It explains when a DoLS authorisation may be needed and describe the process for authorisation and how to make referrals to the system.

This leaflet is for service users and their family/carers as their are being deprived of their liberty under the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. It explains these safeguards and what their rights are.

The court in Re NRA was faced with the need to devise a system which was compliant with Article 5 ECHR (deprivation of liberty) but not so onerous that it diverted resources away from frontline services, caused unnecessary interference in the lives of P and those who care for P, or resulted in excessive delay.

Five test cases involving elderly people (RD, JB, JP, EP and JW) who suffered from a form of dementia were identified to enable the court to consider the question of when an application should be made to court under section 21A MCA. All five individuals were being deprived of their liberty in a care home or hospital setting under a DOLS authorisation. The court gave general guidance as to the approach that should be adopted by RPRs and IMCAs in deciding whether to issue proceedings under s.21A.

This case relates to deprivation of liberty procedure. In Re X and others (Deprivation of Liberty) [2014] EWCOP 25 (and No 2 [2014] EWCOP 37), Sir James Munby, the President of the Court of Protection sought to devise a streamlined process to seek to enable the court to deal with DoL cases in a timely, just, fair and ECHR-compatible way. The Court of Appeal has now held that Sir James Munby P had not been entitled to proceed in the fashion that he did, and that his ‘judgments’ were in fact not authoritative statements of the law.

Findings of a research project to better understand the knowledge and experience GPs have of advance decisions. Five themes emerged from this study and include: GPs had significant gaps in knowledge about advance decisions and how they can benefit people; GPs imposed a financial barrier by charging for appointments to discuss advance decisions; GPs felt that conversations about death, dying and planning for the end of life would be too upsetting or difficult; GPs had negative preconceptions about refusing treatment; and GPs had practical concerns about the ease and process of supporting a person to make an advance decision.

This toolkit supports healthcare professionals’ understanding of advance decisions. It looks at: the legal framework for advance decisions and explains healthcare professionals’ obligations when caring for someone who lacks capacity; what an advance decision is and the criteria one needs to meet; how to support someone to make an advance decision; what steps should be followed if a person lacks capacity and has an advance decision; challenges that healthcare professionals may face when acting on an advance decision and offers practical guidance to help overcome them; and the relationship between advance decisions and lasting power of attorney for health and...

An easy read booklet explaining what DoLS is, including a number of examples showing the right approach.

This factsheet is aimed at service users and is about making sure people are safe in hospital and get the medical care they need. It includes illustrative examples of making decision about capacity and deprivation of liberty.