Emergency guidance for health and social care staff in England and Wales who are caring for adults who lack the relevant mental capacity to consent to their care and treatment during the coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic. This document provides additional guidance to supplement ‘The Mental Capacity Act (2005) (MCA) and deprivation of liberty safeguards (DoLS) during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic’, which was published in April 2020. It includes guidance on: testing someone who lacks the relevant mental capacity; providing life-saving treatment to someone who lacks the capacity to consent; hospitals and care homes; and using emergency public health powers when someone who lacks relevant capacity needs to be isolated because they have symptoms and are not following public health advice. [First published 29 May 2020; last updated 12 January 2021]

The government’s response to the Law Commission’s consultation on how the law should regulate deprivations of liberty (DoLS) for people who lack capacity to consent to their care and treatment arrangements. It sets out the government’s provisional view of each individual proposals, including the areas of authorising a DoL, the duration of authorisation, Independent Mental Capacity Advocates and appointment of appropriate persons, challenging authorisations and the role of the Courts, fit with the Mental Health Act and monitoring. The response agrees in principle that the current DoLs system should be replaced and mostly agrees with the Liberty Protection Safeguards model.

Assessment of the amendment, which introduced the liberty protection safeguards to replace the deprivation of liberty safeguards. the liberty protection safeguards (LPS) were introduced in the Mental Capacity (Amendment) Act 2019. LPS will provide the framework to determine whether a deprivation of liberty is necessary and proportionate for the care or treatment of an individual who lacks the mental capacity to consent to their arrangements, in England and Wales. They will replace the deprivation of liberty safeguards (DoLS) system, which was found to be “bureaucratic” and “too complex” by a House of Lords Committee in 2014. This impact assessment is an updated assessment of the Mental Capacity (Amendment) Act 2019. It provides an assessment of DoLS at present and fully funded, as well as for LPS as set out in the act.

Information about the Liberty Protection Safeguards (LPS) system, which will be replacing the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The LPS will provide protection for people aged 16 and above who are or who need to be deprived of their liberty in order to enable their care or treatment and lack the mental capacity to consent to their arrangements. The guidance outlines the key changes introduced by the LPS: three assessments will form the basis of the authorisation of Liberty Protection Safeguards; greater involvement for families; targeted approach; extending the scheme to and 16 and 17-year-olds; extending the scheme to domestic settings; and the roles of clinical commissioning groups (CCGs), NHS trusts and local health boards as Responsible Bodies.
[Updated 3 August 2021]

This introductory guide is for people detained under sections 2 and 3 of the Mental Health Act, or people who are in hospital as a voluntary patient. A voluntary patient (also called an informal patient) is someone who is in hospital but is not detained under the Mental Health Act. Sections cover: why am I being detained; how should the decision to detain me be made; your right to speak to an independent mental health advocate; what can you or your nearest relative do if you think that you shouldn’t be in hospital; and additional guidance for those who need to stay in hospital and extra help for disabled people.

This document is designed to assist practitioners to begin to address the needs of consumers of financial service in vulnerable circumstances. It consolidates tips and resources gained throughout the course of the FCA’s research. The pack is geared towards firm employees tasked with the development of a vulnerable customer policy/strategy.

This framework aims to assist professionals, and specifically staff working within Gateshead, to understand their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act and to access guidance to assist them in fulfilling them. The document is separated into four main parts: policy – this section outlines the policy structures which underpin MCA practice in Gateshead, including a detailed glossary of terms, the legal context, exploration of the role of the CQC and a discussion of how clear MCA leadership can be structured within individual agencies; considerations for particular agencies – this section examines the impact of the MCA on specific agencies within Gateshead and considers some of the challenges presented; MCA practice and procedural guidance – this section considers specific elements and functions of the MCA, and offers practice and procedural guidance; and DoLS procedural guidance – this section sets out Gateshead’s procedure for the effective operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

This guidance provides a framework to help doctors to make decisions with their patient about their treatment and care. By following it, it will help doctors make sure they have informed consent from their patients. And that they involve families and others when it’s appropriate. It has advice on: what to tell a patient when talking about risks; what to do if a patient doesn’t want to hear information that may be relevant; when to obtain written consent; what needs to be recorded. The guidance will also help doctors when their patients lack capacity (Part 3). It includes a list of things they should consider and has advice on dealing with disagreements.

This interactive tool will help health professionals decide what to do when in doubt about their patient’s capacity to make decisions about their care. The advice is based on the principles in BMA guidance ‘Consent: patients and doctors making decisions together’ and ‘Treatment and care towards the end of life: good practice in decision-making’.

This guidance provides an overview of deputyship. It covers: who can apply to be a deputy; responsibilities; apply to be a deputy; fees; after you’ve applied; when you’re appointed; supervision, support and visits; accounts, gifts and expenses; complete your deputy report; change your deputyship or make a one-off decision; end your deputyship.

Annual report and fees forms and guidance for anyone appointed as a deputy.

This opinion piece by a lay former family-carer argues that the MCA is a somewhat ugly camel, not the beautiful horse many people think it is. The author contends the Act never specifies who can be a best-interests decision-maker; it allows a legally-authorised, but crucially not medically or legally trained, layperson to be appointed as a health and welfare attorney and control best-interests decision-making; and the Act establishes further Codes to be ‘regarded by’ various categories of people, but not by normal family carers, who must obey the Act, but are not required to ‘have regard to’ the Code.