Search results for ‘Subject term:"mental capacity"’ Sort:
Results 1 - 5 of 5
Scrutiny of mental health legislation: follow up: sixteenth report of session 2007-08: report, together with formal minutes and appendices
- Author:
- GREAT BRITAIN. Parliament. Joint Committee on Human Rights
- Publisher:
- Stationery Office
- Publication year:
- 2008
- Pagination:
- 224p.
- Place of publication:
- London
The Joint Committee on Human Rights has published an updated report on new mental health legislation, including the draft Mental Capacity Act 2005 Code of Practice; draft guidance on Bournewood patients (those whose treatment amounts to a deprivation of liberty); and the governments reservation regarding the Council of Europe Recommendation on the protection of the human rights and dignity of persons with mental disorder (Recommendation 2004/10). Concerns about the requirement for medical assessment before detention are common in all cases.
A life like any other?: human rights of adults with learning disabilities: seventh report of session 2007-08: volume 2: oral and written evidence
- Author:
- GREAT BRITAIN. Parliament. Joint Committee on Human Rights
- Publisher:
- Stationery Office
- Publication year:
- 2008
- Pagination:
- 414p.
- Place of publication:
- London
The evidence to the Joint Select Committee on Human Rights paints an often harrowing picture of neglect, abuse and the denial of fundamental human rights to adults living with learning disabilities in the UK. Evidence received by the Committee reveals that people with learning disabilities are more vulnerable to abuse and are less likely to understand their fundamental human rights, including to be treated with dignity and respect by public authorities. Adults with learning disabilities and their advocates and carers told the Committee about how people were denied the opportunity to conduct their own lives as any adult would take for granted including the ability to form and conduct relationships.
A life like any other?: human rights of adults with learning disabilities: seventh report of session 2007-08: volume 1: report and formal minutes
- Author:
- GREAT BRITAIN. Parliament. Joint Committee on Human Rights
- Publisher:
- Stationery Office
- Publication year:
- 2008
- Pagination:
- 153p.
- Place of publication:
- London
The report by the Joint Select Committee on Human Rights paints an often harrowing picture of neglect, abuse and the denial of fundamental human rights to adults living with learning disabilities in the UK. Evidence received by the Committee reveals that people with learning disabilities are more vulnerable to abuse and are less likely to understand their fundamental human rights, including to be treated with dignity and respect by public authorities. Adults with learning disabilities and their advocates and carers told the Committee about how people were denied the opportunity to conduct their own lives as any adult would take for granted including the ability to form and conduct relationships.
The right to freedom and safety: reform of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards: seventh report of session 2017-19
- Author:
- GREAT BRITAIN. Parliament. Joint Committee on Human Rights
- Publisher:
- House of Commons
- Publication year:
- 2018
- Pagination:
- 40
- Place of publication:
- London
This report looks at the Law Commission’s proposals for a new system of deprivation of liberty safeguards, the Liberty Protection Safeguards (LPS), and makes recommendations regarding their implementation. LPS are more targeted than DoLS and would apply to wider categories of people than DoLS, as they would extend to domestic settings, as well as care homes and hospitals. The Committee supports the principle that Article 5 safeguards should be applied to all those deprived of their liberty regardless of their care arrangements, but highlights the importance of establishing a clear definition of “deprivation of liberty” so that such safeguards are applied to those who truly need them. The report concludes that the Law Commission’s proposals could form the basis of a better scheme for authorising deprivations of liberty and that the scheme should be implemented urgently. However, the Committee highlights ongoing and transition costs for local authorities, the courts and the health service and calls for the Government to consider how this scheme might be appropriately funded. It also calls for Parliament to provide a statutory definition of what constitutes a deprivation of liberty in the case of those who lack mental capacity in order to clarify the application of the Supreme Court’s acid test and to bring clarity for families and frontline professionals. (Edited publisher abstract)
Protecting human rights in care settings: fourth report of session 2022-23
- Author:
- GREAT BRITAIN. Parliament. Joint Committee on Human Rights
- Publisher:
- Great Britain. Parliament
- Publication year:
- 2022
- Pagination:
- 47
- Place of publication:
- London
This inquiry has sought to consider what human rights issues need to be addressed in care settings, beyond the immediate concerns arising from the Covid-19 pandemic; how effective providers are at respecting the human rights of people under their care; how effective regulators are in protecting residents from human rights breaches and in supporting patients and residents who make complaints about their care provider; and what lessons need to be learned from the pandemic to prevent breaches of human rights legislation in the future. The inquiry heard that during the pandemic Do Not Attempt Cardio-Pulmonary Resuscitation Notices (DNACPR) were being applied to care users without their knowledge, in a blanket fashion, contrary to the right to life under Article 2 ECHR. There are also concerns about ongoing issues with Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), the check that is put in place to ensure that detention in care settings is within the law and in line with the prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 3 ECHR, and the right to liberty and security, under Article 5 ECHR. In addition, evidence submitted to this inquiry showed that through and beyond the pandemic problems relating to visiting arrangements for those in care settings persisted with providers following guidance. Finally, the report recommends changes to streamline the complaints process, with the roles of the CQC, the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO), and the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) clarified and with all three organisations operating a "no wrong door policy". (Edited publisher abstract)