There’s an excellent piece of investigative work by Community Care about the escalation in the number of Deprivation of Liberty cases since the Supreme Court made a substantial change to the law in Cheshire West.
If you have a chance to read the full thing, I heartily recommend it. (the remainder of this article is my extraction and citation of what I considered to be the main issues)
Half of Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (Dols) cases are breaching legal timescales for completion after a landmark Supreme Court ruling in March triggered a nine-fold rise in monthly referrals to councils, a Community Care investigation has found
In 2013-14 councils received 8,455 requests for Dols assessments; since April this year they’ve already had 32,988 referrals. The figures mean average monthly referrals have risen from 713 in 2013-14 to 6,643 in 2014-15. The effect of the dramatic rise in cases is clear. Last year 2.2% of cases breached timescales; so far this year 50% of cases were not completed in time.
Councils have also seen more legal challenges to deprivations of liberty and one local authority has sent a ‘systemic abuse alert’ to an adult safeguarding board warning that it could not meet the ‘Supreme Court challenge’ due to a shortage of resources.
The court ruling has also intensified a shortage of best interests assessors (BIAs), whose role is to determine whether a person is, or will be, deprived of their liberty and, if so, and whether this is in the person’s best interests. Councils are scrambling to train up more social workers as BIAs in a bid to boost assessor numbers, but many training courses are oversubscribed and, even if a place is secured, training can take months.
We found that the shortage of trained staff in councils means local authorities have already spent £1.4m on independent BIAs in 2014-15. That’s almost three times the £550,000 spent across 12 months in 2013-14.
- Legal challenges are rising: In the first five months of 2014-15 local authorities had 61 legal challenges brought over deprivation of liberty cases. In the 12 months of 2013-14 the councils had received a total of 49 legal challenges.
- Safeguarding concerns have been raised: Cornwall council raised a ‘systemic abuse’ alert with the local safeguarding adults board over the council’s inability to safeguard people under Dols, due to a lack of resources to meet the post ‘Supreme Court challenge’. The council said it wanted to ensure there was independent scrutiny of its response to the judgement. The councils said its “principal difficulty is one of resources and the availability of suitably trained staff to implement the DoLS for the greatly increased numbers. The council referred its concerns into the adult safeguarding process while it took urgent steps to address problem.”
- Stacks of referrals have been held back: Evidence from council reports shows that the referrals received so far are only likely to be a fraction of those that could meet the Supreme Court test as care homes and hospitals are delaying applications. In some cases, council reports say this is due to them ‘ignoring’ or not understanding the implication of the Supreme Court judgement. In other cases it is deliberate:
◦We found one example of a council agreeing with a care provider to delay sending in 30 referrals to help with ‘backlog avoidance’.
◦In a second case, a council report showed that some homes had delayed in sending in referrals as they were ‘sympathetic’ to the pressures on the local authority. In the report, the council’s Dols lead said that this was often happening ‘to the detriment’ of the person. The report shows that the Dols lead contacted the homes and told them to make the applications.
◦A third council report we obtained showed that a local acute hospital had still to send in applications. The hospital had conducted an initial scoping exercise and identified a potential 35,000 referrals. This alone would lead to the Dols team facing a 350-fold increase in cases, the report showed.
Information drawn from the Health and Social Care Information Centre from 130 of 152 councils make the point even more vividly. http://www.hscic.gov.uk/catalogue/PUB15475
A 600% increase in monthly referrals is a terrifying amount. There is simply no way that social workers, local authority lawyers, best interest assessors, lawyers for families, the Official Solicitor or the Courts can cope with that sort of increase.
The councils received 21,600 Dols applications from April to June 2014, compared with 12,400 in the whole of 2013-14, a 597% increase in monthly referrals;
- of these, 51% were authorised, 12% were not authorised, and 36% had not been withdrawn or not signed off by the council as of September 2014.
(I’m really impressed with the work that Community Care have done on this, and I hope that everyone in the field reads their piece, hence my bigging it up here)
It is not always necessary to deprive persons of liberty to rob them.For example the 94 year old retired midwife featured in the Mail was declared to have no” capacity ” despite a top psychologist saying she did have it ! This enabled the local authority to block her bank account and ignore pleas from the elderly lady from a bench in the well of the court that social workers should leave her alone as she had “all her marbles”.Her life savings of £60,000 were used up to pay court fees and especially to pay a parasite called the “official solicitor” leaving her penniless except for her house which will probably be sold soon !”. He of course agreed with social services all the way contrary to the wishes of his client !
No one should be declared to have no capacity or to be deprived of their liberty(like the Italian caesarean lady) without having the chance to call in professionals chosen by them to prove the contrary. That however might stop the looting and many of the forced adoptions and that for some “would never do” !
And as ever, when Ian talks about a case, it is worth reading the actual judgments published in that case to get rather a different flavour of it.
Nothing in the judgement justifies legally robbing this lady of her life savings of £60,000 leaving her penniless and then gagging her with an order to forbid her to go to the press to complain !
Reblogged this on tummum's Blog and commented:
Another great post xx
Pingback: Cheshire West fallout | Legal In General | Sco...