header-logo header-logo

17 April 2014 / Beverley Taylor , Sophy Miles
Issue: 7603 / Categories: Features , Mental health
printer mail-detail

Capacity in crisis?

Sophy Miles & Beverley Taylor highlight the problems stemming from the Mental Capacity Act 2005

The House of Lords Select Committee on the Mental Capacity Act has recently condemned the failure to implement a “visionary” piece of legislation which “had the potential to transform the lives of many”. In a stinging report, the committee described one part of the legislation, the controversial deprivation of liberty safeguards (DOLS), as unfit for purpose.

The committee described its work as “shining a light” on an area of public policy which might otherwise have been neglected. At the start of its work it was told by officials from the Ministry of Justice and the Department of Health that the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005) was “a success”. As the evidence emerged it became clear that this assessment was over-optimistic. By the concluding sessions the minister of state for care and support, Norman Lamb, had accepted that the implementation and understanding of the Act was a “work in progress”. The government has established a Mental Capacity

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll