Access to the community for P: a s.21A deprivation of liberty hearing

Judge Eldergill stated that P had mentioned wanting to be able to go to a restaurant (and there was also some mention of P being able to go to a bank). He referred to Paragraph X (of the Position Statement) which stated that the Home was concerned about P going out alone because he was at risk of absconding. However, the judge raised a point about the seemingly low likely risk of this happening, given that at another paragraph, it stated that P uses a Zimmer frame and so clearly has mobility issues. 

Medical treatment for people with learning disabilities: Telling Robert Bourn’s story and the challenges of ‘transparency’

The initial response of his treating team, says his mother, was to say there were no treatment options.  Comfort measures only were proposed and a palliative care referral was made.

Office of the Public Guardian steps in when attorneys don’t agree

I have made an LPA for Property and Affairs myself and was conscious at the time that they are not without their difficulties. In this case, there is a real possibility that, as P’s assets reduce, either he or his wife will have to move home and reduce their standard of living. With the best will in the world, I am not sure how this could or should be resolved, and family conflict seems almost unavoidable. In my case I have chosen to include a professional as an Attorney, accepting that this will come at a cost. 

Who should take responsibility for property and financial affairs – the Local Authority or the family?

I can’t help feeling that there is a serious gap in the law which is supposed to ensure the best interests of someone who has been judged to lack capacity and yet (in the absence of an LPA) leaves their property and finances in limbo until another quite separate and lengthy legal process has taken place. I was very lucky that my mother’s house was not vandalized, as P’s house obviously had been.

A contested hearing about whether or not to have another hearing

By Celia Kitzinger, 26th July 2022 This hearing (COP 13452747 before by DJ Beckley at First Avenue House on 6th July 2022, via MS Teams) was originally intended to be a review hearing to consider how P, a man in his 20s with learning disability, autism and epilepsy, has settled into his new placement. The plan had been to reviewContinue reading “A contested hearing about whether or not to have another hearing”

Family members as parties to proceedings: Pros and cons

By Astral Heaven, 21st July 2022 I am a Local Authority Approved Mental Health Professional (AMHP) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) Lead and a practising Best Interests Assessor (BIA).  Part of my role as BIA when I’m undertaking DoLS assessments is to talk with the person I am assessing, and with their family and friends,Continue reading “Family members as parties to proceedings: Pros and cons”

“She is religious and she is a fighter”: Three perspectives on best interests decision-making in the Court of Protection from ‘Compassion in Dying’

By Jemma Woodley, Zach Moss and Upeka de Silva, 23rd June 2022 Editorial Note: The judgment has now been published: Imperial Healthcare NHS Trust v C & Ors [2022] EWCOP 28 We are three people who work for Compassion in Dying, a national charity that supports people to make their own decisions about end-of-life care inContinue reading ““She is religious and she is a fighter”: Three perspectives on best interests decision-making in the Court of Protection from ‘Compassion in Dying’”

Sisters’ dispute over Deputyship – and a concern about open justice

By Daniel Cloake, 20th June 2022 Two feuding sisters (Ms J and Ms E) have asked the Court of Protection to pick one of them as a deputy after their father lost capacity to manage his finances following a series of strokes. The hearing I observed was listed on the “Daily Hearing List” on the court’sContinue reading “Sisters’ dispute over Deputyship – and a concern about open justice”

Happy Second Birthday to the Open Justice Court of Protection Project

By Celia Kitzinger, Gill Loomes-Quinn, Claire Martin and Kirsty Stuart, 15th June 2022 It’s two years ago today since two of us (Celia and Gill) launched the Open Justice Court of Protection Project, at the beginning of the pandemic. It was born of our passionate belief that “publicity is the very soul of justice” atContinue reading “Happy Second Birthday to the Open Justice Court of Protection Project”

Fairness in court for a Litigant in Person

There’s an application for an injunction against P’s wife ordering her to move out of his house in two weeks’ time.  This is because P would like to move back home (he’s currently in residential care) but she is alleged to have abused him.