Examines the practical implications of the dual legislative regime governing involuntary treatment and how the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Mental Health Act 1983 interface. Whilst the MCA is concerned with individuals who lack capacity to make decisions for themselves, and legal protection for their carers/care workers, the MHA is concerned with minimising the undesirable effects of mental disorder by maximising patient safety and wellbeing and by protecting other people from harm.

Books Beyond Words use pictures to tell stories that engage and empower people, on themes such as love and relationships, health, death and dying, and crime. They are also a tool for professionals to use with people in many different teaching and counselling situations.

This document contains the advance decision to refuse treatment form – the form sets out the situations in which individuals want to refuse medical treatment if they are unable to make or communicate that decision in the future; and guidance notes – this gives information to help people complete the form. The notes explain when an advance decision would be used and offers support to consider the wishes.

This factsheet provides essential information on advance decision, lasting power of attorney for health and welfare, and capacity.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (MCA DOLS) exists to protect people who cannot make decisions about their care and where personal freedoms need to be restricted in the patients best interests. The following guidance is for hospitals and care home managers to support them understand and fulfil their statutory obligations under the Mental Capacity Act Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards legislation.

This booklet is one of a series of six on the Mental Capacity Act published by the Mental Capacity Implementation Programme (MCIP). MCIP is a joint government programme between the Department of Health, the Department for Constitutional Affairs, the Public Guardianship Office and the Welsh Assembly Government that has been established to implement the organisation, process and procedures to launch the Mental Capacity Act in 2007. This booklet provides information on the Independent Mental Capacity Advocate (IMCA) service established by the Mental Capacity Act. It is not a statutory Code of Practice issued under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and is not a guide to how the law will apply to specific situations Following the implementation of the Mental Capacity Act on 1 October 2007 the series of information leaflets on the Mental Capacity Act can now be downloaded from the Office of the Public Guardian website. The Office of the Public Guardian supports the Public Guardian in registering enduring powers of attorney, lasting powers of attorney and supervising court-appointed deputies.

This report looks at some of the common issues and complaints investigated by the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman concerning people who lack mental capacity and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) system. The report includes individual case studies to show the impact on people when things go wrong. It estimates that 20 per cent of the 1,212 adult social care complaints investigated by the Ombudsman in the year 2016/17 concerned mental capacity or DoLS. Common issues included: not completing, or delays in carrying out, mental capacity assessments; poor ‘best interests’ decision making; disagreements with the process and failure to involving families; delay in obtaining DoLS authorisations; and failure to carry out full assessments before applying for DoLS. Drawing on the results of investigations, the report provides good practice points to help social care professionals get it right firs time when working with people who may lack mental capacity. It also provides a list of questions to help councillors scrutinise their own authorities.

An easy read version of the Law Commission Mental Capacity and Deprivation of Liberty: interim statement.

This Act amends the Mental Capacity Act 2005 in relation to procedures with which a person may be deprived of liberty where the person lacks capacity to consent. It includes amendments of authorising of arrangements enabling care and treatment which give rise to a deprivation of liberty; and Section 42 of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 code of practice in relation to Deprivation of liberty. The legislation provides for the repeal of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and their replacement with a new scheme called the Liberty Protection Safeguards (LPS).

The Committee’s key finding in this evidence-led inquiry is that the Mental Capacity Act 2005 is not widely implemented. To address this, the Committee recommends that responsibility for implementing the Act be given to an independent body. The Committee’s second key finding is that the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards are not fit for purpose. The Committee recommends that they be replaced with new provisions. This report considers: whether the Act is working as intended in respect of the Act’s five core principles; how to address poor implementation of the Act; advocacy and advance planning; whether the Court of Protection is appropriate (or should there be a Mental Capacity Tribunal instead); and criminal law provisions under Section 44 of the Act. It summarises and refers to cases of unlawful detention under the Act (Steven Neary), and the deprivation of liberty of an autistic man with a profound learning disability, HL at Bournewood Hospital for 32 years. It includes as a good practice example, the work by Jim Blair, a learning disability nurse consultant who explained adjustments made for effective treatment and outcomes for adults with learning disabilities appropriate to their needs. The Committee makes recommendations to Government to: work with regulators and professional bodies to ensure the Act is given a higher profile in training, standard setting and inspections; increase staff resources at the Court of Protection to speed up handling of non-controversial cases; and reconsider the provision of non-means tested legal aid to those who lack capacity, especially in cases of deprivation of liberty. Local authorities should use their discretionary powers to appoint Independent Mental Capacity Advocates more widely than is currently the case. The Government should act on the poor levels of awareness and understanding of Lasting Powers of Attorney and advance decisions to refuse treatment among professionals in the health and social care sectors. The Government should also review the criminal law provision for ill-treatment or neglect of a person lacking capacity, to ensure that the Act is fit for purpose. The Committee recommends that the House of Lords seek an update from the Government twelve months from now to find out what they have done in response to their key recommendations. An easy read version is also available.

SCIE guide to support the commissioning of the Independent Mental Capacity Advocate (IMCA) service

SCIE Guide on practice guidance on the involvement of Independent Mental Capacity Advocates (IMCAs) in safeguarding adults