Reform of Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard – views by 2nd March

Freedom versus Protection

Lady Hale’s supreme court judgement of the ‘Guilded cage’ has substantially widened the definition of DOLS and led to the Court of Protection being inundated with cases waiting – and Local Authorities having to assess situations which do seem to have the person’s agreement and be in their best interests.

Bureaucracy intrusions helping/hindering?

As we have strived to help people have an ordinary life in the community in their own homes, we find people who’ve quite happily lived in their tenancy for more than 30 yrs without any orders now subject to COP orders..and assessments. They may need a level of supervision for their safety which means being accompanied to activities of their choice and having a someone stay overnight  staff overnight, but is this really a derpivation of their liberty – more likely to be an enabler of their liberty.

How to achieve the least restrictive solutions?

We need the Liberty Protection Safeguards proposals to be a sensible balance that takes account of people’s life in the community and at home – and helps practitioners (who increasingly don’t know the person any more) to make sensible assessment decisions,so people don’t get unreasonably surrounded by bureaucracy in living their lives.

Protecting people at risk?

We know that the risks seem to be more about people being put away/out of sight and incarcerated in institutions where what happens is not seen or heard – and in services where there is not sufficient outside oversight.. a safeguard might be better ensuring everyone in a service has someone on their life not connected with the service. There is also a risk that hidden services might not report deprivations of liberty too….?

Your views are important

Please check this out and make sure it would work for you and yours, but also help protect those in less good situations…