Comments on: Guardianship – Making decisions

By: cb

cb — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 20:32:16 +0000

Thanks for that TT. I have my own AMHP conversion course coming up in a couple of weeks! It’s good to know that. It is a bit confusing at the moment (certainly to me. I’ve only been warranted a couple of months!)

By: TT

TT — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 17:31:54 +0000

Answered one of my own questions today. Attended the first day of two AMHP conversion courses and appears that Guardianship will now be given powers to convey- also interesting debates between Guardianship, ‘best interests’ and the new Community Treatment Orders that seemingly will take a little time to bed down- not sure if I can see the difference at this stage between these and Section 17 leave

By: cb

cb — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 05:38:01 +0000

Thanks, WL. That really means to a lot to me.

By: Welshcakes Limoncello

Welshcakes Limoncello — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 22:20:35 +0000

Excellent post, as was your previous one about this. I like the way you analyse the situation but still show that you care very much about A. I do not envy you in having to be a paer of the decision-making process here, but the system needs more people who care as you do.

By: cb

cb — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 19:32:22 +0000

Thanks TT. I found the new Code of Practice almost by accident and although it isn’t ‘in force’ under November, I think it has some good pointers on the intention of the law. I agree that conveyance continues to be an ‘issue’. I wouldn’t be surprised if some kind of MCA case law turns up sooner rather than later to clarify. In the meantime, my instinct would be to assume that s4 of the MCA would allow it.
To date, no, I haven’t specifically sought legal advice on this particular case but if I were to, it’d be the trust (as it’s the Mental Health Act). I haven’t had much dealing with the Trust solicitors. I hope they respond more speedily than the local authority ones

By: TT

TT — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 18:01:20 +0000

A top post. Really helpful and I applaud you for trawling through the codes of practice.

Fasinating that the new COP for the MHA is clear about using it if there is need to return the patient to the setting where they are living. I wonder how many times this needs to happen before the care plan is considered unworkable.

If you go for Guardianship rather than MCA on the grounds that you can return the patient how do you get them there in the first place (not needed in your case) as Guardianship has no specific powers to convey but might depend on the lawyers’ interpretation. This brings us back to ‘best interests’ which I have been led to believe can be expanded to cover all aspects of care including conveyance or returning patients.

Really looking forward to hearing the outcome. Are you getting legal advice and if so do you get it from the LA or the Trust?

By: cb

cb — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 17:18:43 +0000

It is. There is no right answer but lots of guidelines and guidance – it’s just making sense of it that is the problem sometimes!

By: LCSW mom

LCSW mom — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 16:04:27 +0000

Mental Capacity is a delicate and difficult issue. In fact I just constructed an email to send around to folks exactly on this matter. Here we have something called conservatorship which is done through the court system. Basically it removes a person’s ability to make decisions for themselves. However, there are many, many folks who are conserved but go whereever they please and continue with their deterimental lifestyles. I’m not sure there is a good answer for any of it. We can’t really tie folks down, if they are ambulatory. I am working on a post about this issue. Difficult to say the least.