Although the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) has implications for other aspects of Prader-Willi syndrome (PWS), this article focuses on the possible relevance of the MCA in the management of the over-eating behaviour and risk of life-threatening obesity associated with the syndrome. Although people with PWS are capable of making decisions about many areas of their life, dysfunction in areas of the brain that control eating behaviour and energy balance means that they will rarely have the capacity independently to make decisions about eating. Even if they can make a decision at one point in time, this may not be the case at other times, particularly in the absence of supervision or environmental restrictions on access to food. The document covers the existing legal provisions and ethical considerations for people with PWS, including decision-making capacity and Deprivation of Liberty.

These materials have been created to help support health and social care professionals working with individuals whose decision-making capacity is limited, fluctuating, absent or compromised. Demographic changes mean there are increasing numbers of people living with conditions which may impact on their decision-making capacity, and as such it is vital that professionals are confident in their understanding use of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. This tool brings together information from a range of professionals working in the field of mental capacity to provide a comprehensive guide to practice. It is part of a wider research project funded by the Burdett Trust for Nursing. Sections include: 1. Reflecting on values and bias in mental capacity decision-making; 2. The history and current context of mental capacity legislation and policy; 3. The concept of mental capacity; 4. Best interests; 5. Supported decision making; 6. Deprivation of liberty: human rights; 7. MCA in clinical decisions for care and treatment; 8. MCA and the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) role.

Up to 75% of UK care home residents may lack the mental capacity to make certain decisions (Wade, Clinical Rehabilitation, 2019, 33, 1561-1570). Care home staff need evidence-based tools to help them assess residents’ mental capacity and provide decision-making support (NICE, Decision-making and mental capacity NICE guideline NG108, 2018). The Mental Capacity Assessment Support Toolkit (MCAST) was designed to support multidisciplinary healthcare staff to prepare, complete and document legally compliant mental capacity assessments. MCAST has not yet been trialled in care homes. This study used a descriptive qualitative design to: (a) understand the current challenges faced by care home staff when supporting residents to make decisions and participate in mental capacity assessments; (b) explore staff members’ support needs in this context and (c) to identify if and how the toolkit could be adapted for use in care homes. A purposive sample of 29 staff working as managers (n = 18), nurses (n = 7) and care assistants (n = 4) across five care homes in North West England participated in five semi-structured focus groups between May and July 2019. Data from the focus group transcripts were analysed thematically (Braun & Clarke, Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2006, 3, 77-101). Five main themes were identified: (a) involvement of residents in decision-making; (b) approaches to mental capacity assessment; (c) working with residents with communication difficulties; (d) feelings about practice and (e) responses to MCAST. Participants appeared competent and confident about supporting decision-making and assessing capacity, but recognised the complexity of this area of practice, and identified a need for further support. They reported a range of challenges, including accessing support from speech and language therapists for residents with communication needs. They responded positively to the toolkit and were keen to use it in practice. This study suggests that care home staff would benefit from, and welcome, support to develop their practice. Furthermore, MCAST appears usable in this context and formal feasibility testing is justified.

Purpose: Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), as part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (DoLS, 2007), was established to provide a legal framework for decision-making in respect of adults who lack capacity to make decisions in relation to their care and residence in England and Wales. The purpose of this study was to explore the DoLS decision-making process from the perspectives of health and social care practitioners when working with individuals with an acquired brain injury (ABI). Design/methodology/approach: A total of 12 health and social care practitioners were interviewed in 2019–2020 about their experiences of using and making or supporting decisions in the DoLS framework with ABI survivors. Data were analysed, and a tentative explanation of variations in DoLS decision-making was developed. Findings: Three distinct approaches emerged capturing different decision-making styles (risk-averse, risk-balancing and risk-simplifying) which appeared to influence the outcome of DoLS assessments. A range of mediating factors seemed to account for the variability in these styles. The wider contextual challenges that impact upon practitioners’ overall experiences and use of DoLS processes in their ABI practice were noted. Research limitations/implications: The findings highlight a need for changes in practice and policy in relation to how DoLS or similar processes are used in decision-making practice with ABI survivors and may be relevant to the implementation of the Liberty Protection Safeguards that are replacing the DoLS system. Originality/value: To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to explore accounts of DoLS decision-making practices in ABI service.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to consider the role of social work professional evidence in mental capacity law, specifically Court of Protection proceedings. The authors analyse how social workers perform as evidence givers in this domain and how social work as a profession is perceived alongside other professions within the context of adult social care decision-making in mental capacity law. Design/methodology/approach: This paper draws on textual evidence from judgments and existing empirical data published elsewhere. The authors consider the contribution of social work professional expertise to best interests decision-making in formal legal proceedings which, in turn, reflects on how social work expertise is relevant in everyday practice. Findings: The findings of this paper include that social workers are well placed to be experts on best interests decision-making in mental capacity law. However, the authors show that the Court of Protection has not always endorsed this form of social work expertise in its judgments, meaning that social workers can struggle to articulate an expert knowledge base. Originality/value: Overall, the authors conclude that social work evidence is incredibly valuable as expertise about the person’s best interests, particularly in the domain of welfare cases and care planning.

With a growing global ageing population, approaches to assess and support decision-making are becoming more pertinent. This scoping review aimed to identify and map current knowledge on assessment of older adults’ decision-making capacity in relation to independent living. A five-stage scoping review framework was followed. Inclusion criteria were papers on assessment approaches used to evaluate decision-making capacity of older adults, aged 60 years and over for independent living, including studies involving people with cognitive impairment and dementia. Five databases were searched for publications with eligibility criteria from January 2000 to December 2020; 4,118 results were retrieved from sources, resulting in 29 publications being analysed, eight of which were research reports. Publication characteristics and methodologies varied; however, many common components of decision-making capacity assessment for independent living were identified including cognitive, functional, environmental and risk assessment. Overall, a multidisciplinary approach was recommended, and consideration of the person’s values and preferences is noted in many publications. Decision-making capacity assessment for independent living of older adults requires multicomponent, multidisciplinary assessment. Future work is needed to examine this from the perspective of older adults and their caregivers.

Brief guidance on Court appointed deputies and independent mental capacity advocates.

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.

This report explores the context in which the decision of whether to use the MHA or the MCA to authorise a deprivation of liberty is made and the different factors that practitioners use to assess and weigh up which Act is most appropriate and ‘least restrictive’ for the individual concerned. The research used a mixed-methods approach with an online survey to capture the diversity of factors that influence decision-making across clinical groups, and qualitative interviews with clinicians and professionals to explore in depth their understanding of the interface and experiences of making this decision in practice. A large proportion of participants in this research report encountering people to whom this decision applies at least once a month, if not weekly. This decision most commonly applies to people who have dementia, but also to people with a wide range of mental disorders, including those with functional mental illnesses, neurodevelopment and neurological conditions. Participants report most commonly applying this decision to people in community settings, but application also occurs in mental health and acute hospitals including in the emergency department. There is a lack of common understanding around fundamental issues on which this decision is based including core concepts of capacity and objection. Blanket rules exist within professional groups and across different settings that restrict decision-making. The rights afforded to people admitted and treated in some settings and areas of England may not be afforded to those in others. The majority of participants report that their training covered decision-making at the interface of the Acts. However, codes of practice and case law are described as difficult to understand and keep up to date with. Understanding clinical decision-making at the in. Practitioners highlight a number of different ways in which patients are unlawfully deprived of their liberty as a result of the factors outlined above.

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.

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).

This report on the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and care planning provides guidance for both commissioners and provider of social care on how care and support plans can comply with the principles of the MCA.