Search results

This paper aims to review recent cases in the Court of Protection on the issue of article 8 ECHR right to respect for family life and whether it requires a starting point that it is in an incapacitated adult's best interests to be cared from at home. In this context, it examines the role of article 19 UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) in the article 8 and best interests analysis carried out by the court under s.4 Mental Capacity Act 2005.

The article examines the recent cases of K v. A Local Authority, FM and GM v. A Health Board and recent cases on the status of the UNCRPD in English Law to explore whether the UK's obligations under that convention require there to be a starting point that incapacitated adults should be cared for at home.

The Court of Protection has made it clear that talking in terms of presumptions is unhelpful when it comes to the s.4 MCA 2005 checklist. The broad terms of s.4 require that all relevant circumstances are taken into account which would include any potential infringement of article 8 ECHR.

The article identifies an argument that could be used by campaigners and practitioners who advocate for the right for disabled persons to be cared for at home, through an analysis of recent cases. It notes the argument's limitations with respect to incapacitated adults and the application of s.4 Mental Capacity Act 2005.

No Secrets: Guidance on developing and implementing multiagency policies and procedures to protect vulnerable adults from abuse was introduced as formal guidance in 2000 (Department of Health, 2000). In July 2009, the government published Safeguarding Adults: Report on the consultation on the review of the ‘No Secrete’ guidance (Department of Health, 2009), paving the way for revised guidance. In the 10 years since the introduction of No Secrets, we have seen many changes in the field of adult protection, including reconceptualisation of this area of practice in terms of ‘safeguarding’. As guidance, No Secrets operates within the context of current legislation and case law. This legal landscape has developed considerably over the last 10 years and it is apposite to review those changes; the effect of which must be integrated into any review. 2010 also marks 10 years since the implementation of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HM Government, 1998) and while its influence is clear in some developments, certain case law decisions have been disappointing.

This paper aims to present a simple conceptual framework, outlining four pathways for guiding multi‐agency involvement in different situations of adult abuse.

The essential elements of best practice for each pathway are described.

The four situations is a framework that, together with the seven‐stage safeguarding adults pathway, has been evidenced through practice to provide a conceptual tool on which to base multi‐agency activity in response to a large variety of concerns about safeguarding adults.

The four situations framework creates a straight‐forward template that provides guidance to all concerned as to which organisations will be involved in the steps of developing the safeguarding pathways and what their roles and responsibilities will be.

Recent growth of concern relating to ‘elder abuse’ concurrent with recognition of the importance of user involvement has suggested a link between these two developments. Here, however, Phil Slater argues that generalised principles cannot generate blueprints for implementation. A concrete illustration of the general arguments is offered.

This paper aims to review the recent Court of Protection case law on deprivation of liberty and consider whether it will help to achieve the right balance between minimising state interference with individuals and families, and protection of the most vulnerable, or risk undermining the core purpose of the system.

The paper reviews the underlying rationale of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS), the implications of the recent key Court of Appeal judgment in P v. Cheshire West and Chester.

There are significant potential adverse effects from the judgment in Cheshire, and the way in which it has been interpreted to date, including a risk of undermining the very purpose of DOLS, and a risk of discriminatory effect.

The paper provides a detailed analysis of Cheshire from the perspective of a Court of Protection practitioner, and advice on a practical approach to dealing with the concerns it raises.

The prominence of the best interests principle in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 represented an important transition to a more resolutely patient-centred model regarding decision-making for incapable adults (“P”). This paper aims to examine the courts’ consideration of P’s values, wishes and beliefs in the context of medical treatment, reflect on whether this has resulted in a wide interpretation of the best interests standard and consider how this impacts clinical decision makers.

A particular focus will be on case law from the Court of Protection of England and Wales and the Supreme Court of the UK. Cases have been selected for discussion on the basis of the significance of their judgements for the field, the range of issues they illustrate and the extent of commentary and attention they have received in the literature. They are presented as a narrative review and are non-exhaustive.

With respect to values, wishes and beliefs, the best interests standard’s interpretation in the courts has been widely varied. Opposing tensions and thematic conflicts have emerged from this case law and were analysed from the perspective of the clinical decision maker.

This review illustrates the complexity and gravity of decisions of the clinical decision makers and the courts have considered in the context of best interests determinations for incapacitated adults undergoing medical treatment. Subsequent to the first such case before the Supreme Court of the UK, emerging case law trends relating to capacity legislation are considered.

This paper originates from accessing the Cornwall Council website (Cornwall Council, 2010) in order to download the report of the serious case review into the murder of Steven Hoskin for teaching purposes on a Post‐Qualifying Social Work programme. However, there were another two serious case review reports posted, which were also relevant to the course. This reflective piece follows from a reading of the executive summary of one of them ‐ the Serious Case Review report into the death of JK (a 76‐year‐old female) in 2008 in Cornwall (Cornwall & Isles of Scilly Safeguarding Adults Board, 2009). While adult safeguarding is everybody's business, because of the original reason for accessing the report, the paper approaches the issues primarily from a social work perspective.

This paper considers the emergence of adult protection as a significant issue for health and welfare professionals. A range of definitions and dilemmas are considered alongside a comprehensive review of how abuse is manifested. A brief review of the latest research is followed by principles of good practice.

This paper reports on a prospective study of 44 cases of alleged abuse of vulnerable adults referred under a joint vulnerable adults policy. The authors examine attitudes to policy, special training and joint working, re‐abuse, continuing risk and the outcome of legal proceedings. The implications of the findings are discussed and recommendations made.