By Celia Kitzinger, 31st January 2023 At some point in the future, there may be a time for all of us when we can’t make decisions for ourselves. It may come suddenly, as it did for my younger sister, Polly, who was catastrophically brain-injured in a car crash in 2009. Or we may lose capacity toContinue reading “‘Test case’ on Lasting Powers of Attorney – with troubling delay”
By Anna (daughter of a P) I’m involved in a Court of Protection s 21A application concerning my mother and the origin of this case was a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) application. So when I learnt about this course run by Edge Training specifically for family members of people in care homes and hospitalsContinue reading “Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards: A course for families”
The judge summarised the proceedings stating “I formally record the LPAs are invalid and should not be registered, and the application for deputyship for property and affairs is approved”. The LPAs were invalid was because Stephen lacked capacity at the time of signing the documents.
It would be helpful for the Guidance to consider ways in which the taint of deception could be removed, as far as possible, from cases involving closed hearings and to recognise and seek to minimise the moral injury they can cause.
At any point in the last two years of treatment, A might have discovered the medication in her food, or been alerted to the medication by a carer. At any point her grandparents (who visited her in person) could have commented on her pubertal development and raised suspicions. Or she herself could have questioned her breast development, her hair growth or changing body shape. Was there really no contingency plan in place to deal with this?
There was a plan to provide sex and relationship education, but the COVID-19 pandemic and a failure to locate educational providers intervened and so it was sometime later when an education programme to support capacity in relation to sex and marriage was completed. A newly appointed expert then assessed P again and said that P had still not gained capacity in these areas.
Unfortunately, the timing of his reappearance in his mother’s life had led the care home and the LA to suspect that he had only sought out his mother so that he might benefit from the inheritance himself.
What happened in this case strikes at the very heart of the work of the Open Justice Court of Protection Project. It’s very unfortunate that the manner in which this case became public knowledge was via a blog post based on a misapprehension of the facts – necessitating a Statement correcting those facts.
By Daniel Cloake, 12 October 2022 Editorial Note: The Open Justice Court of Protection Project has issued a formal Statement about the case described here. This is an observer’s account of the first day of that hearing. The judgment is publicly available: Re A  EWCOP 44. We subsequently raised concerns about the court’s decision toContinue reading ““I have to tell you something which may well come as a shock”, says Court of Protection judge”
We will now investigate how it came about that an observer was admitted to a public hearing in which a salient (‘magnetic’) fact of the case was meticulously concealed (by order of the court), leading – surely inevitably – to inaccurate reporting.