Challenging deprivation of liberty: advocating for your rights

We examined the accounts from the experts involved on each side of the case including different views on the person ’s capacity to make certain decisions. We examined several of the individual's psychological and psychiatric assessments. We interviewed the individual on two occasions: once during the appeals process, and following his successful appeal. Findings We identified several reasons as to why the individual was successful in appealing against the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Firstly, the individual was able to seek legal support to appeal independently. Secondly, experts involved on each side of the case had differing opinions regarding capacity to make certain decisions. Thirdly, the indication of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards was subsequently declared not valid. Finally, we found that the quality of life and psychological wellbeing for the individual improved following removal of restrictions. Practical implications We highlight the wider issues relating to an individuals ’ rights to challenge authorisations in the Court of Protection as well as to future considerations and directions of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards legislation in light of evolving case law. Originality/value We examine the barriers to challenging Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards author isation and the ever evolving Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards process
Source: Advances in Mental Health and Intellectual Disabilities - Category: Disability Source Type: research