The Liberty Protection Safeguards (LPS) will provide protection for people aged 16 and above who are, or who need to be, deprived of their liberty to enable their care or treatment and who lack the mental capacity to consent to their arrangements. People who might have an LPS authorisation include those with dementia, autism and learning disabilities who lack the relevant capacity. The approved mental capacity professional (AMCP) is a new, specialist role providing enhanced oversight for those people who need it most. AMCPs will be independent, trained, registered professionals.
[Updated 11 June 2021]

There is little empirical research focusing on how social workers experience the law in their everyday professional practice, and still less on how mental health social workers experience assessment for compulsory admission under mental health law. The article is informed by a hermeneutic phenomenological approach, drawing on in-depth interviews and practitioner diaries with social work Approved Mental Health Professionals (AMHPs), providing exploration of how social work AMHPs experience compulsory assessment under mental health law in practice. This is revealed as a socio-relational process, involving a focus on the person in their environment in relation to others, such as family and professionals. Ethical challenges realising human rights social work practice are illuminated. This draws attention to how space for such practice can be eroded by systems conditions. The importance of amplifying the voice of the person assessed is highlighted in the context that their voice is severely diminished during the process of assessment. The article provides insights on the complexity involved in compulsory mental health practice, drawing attention to trust as an important concept. Finally, the article argues that realising human rights-oriented AMHP practice requires social work to challenge systems conditions that erode the ability to do so.

The focus of this report is on the MHA and its interface with the MCA, Deprivation of Liberty and the implications of the Supreme Court judgment (P v Cheshire West and Chester Council and P and Q v Surrey County Council [2014] UKSC 19). The latter has made it clearer and easier for providers and decision makers to identify where a person is being deprived of their liberty but has also led to a considerable increase in the numbers of people in England and Wales who are considered to be deprived of their liberty for the purposes of receiving care and treatment. The paper summarises the findings from a survey on the court judgment impacted on AMHP practice and service delivery. They show that there has been significant impact on AMHPs and service providers, but the situation appears to be more challenging for certain local authorities where a large proportion of their Best Interests Assessors for DoLS are drawn from the AMHP service. Landmark changes impacting AMHP practice and the local authorities on behalf of which the professionals act have been made as result of the Cheshire West judgement but there remain barriers and challenges in fully implementing these changes arising from the complex and bureaucratic DoLS framework. The Law Commission has been tasked to look for a framework that is simpler, while still protecting the rights of vulnerable people with mental health problems and those who lack capacity, with final report and draft legislation due to be published in summer 2017.