Spotlight
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
Queer(y)ing consummation: an empirical reflection on the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 and the role of consummation
Alexander Maine, Lecturer in Law, Leicester Law School, University of LeicesterKeywords: Consummation – adultery – marriage – empirical research – LGBTQConsummation and...
A v A (Return Without Taking Parent) [2021] EWHC 1439 (Fam)
(Family Division, MacDonald J, 18 May 2021)Abduction – Application for return order under Hague Convention 1980 - Art 13(b) defence – Whether mother’s allegations against the father...
Domestic Abuse Toolkit for Employers
The Insurance Charities have released an update to the Domestic Abuse Toolkit for Employers.Employers have a duty of care and a legal responsibility to provide a safe and effective work...
Two-week rapid consultation launched on remote, hybrid and in-person family hearings
The President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, has announced the launch of a two-week rapid consultation on remote, hybrid and in-person hearings in the family justice system and the...
Pension sharing orders: Finch v Baker
The Court of Appeal judgment in Finch v Baker [2021] EWCA Civ 72 was released on 28 January 2021. The judgment provides some useful guidance on not being able to get what are essentially...
View all articles
Authors

Disabled woman returned home after Court of Protection finds local council unlawfully removed her from family

Sep 29, 2018, 19:55 PM
family law, court of protection, residential care, mental capacity act, autism, local authority
Lawyers at Irwin Mitchell, have successfully secured the return home of a young woman with autism and severe learning disabilities has been successfully returned after it was found the local authority’s decision to keep her in residential care with restricted access to her family was a serious breach of her human rights.
Slug : disabled-woman-returned-home-after-court-of-protection-finds-local-council-unlawfully-removed-her-from-family
Meta Title : Disabled woman returned home after Court of Protection finds local council unlawfully removed her from family
Meta Keywords : family law, court of protection, residential care, mental capacity act, autism, local authority
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Sep 24, 2014, 06:59 AM
Article ID : 107105

Judge finds Somerset County Council was in serious breach of family’s human rights

Lawyers at Irwin Mitchell, have successfully secured the return home of a young woman with autism and severe learning disabilities has been successfully returned after it was found the local authority’s decision to keep her in residential care with restricted access to her family was a serious breach of her human rights.

In a judgment from the regional Court of Protection in Bristol which was published on 23 September his Honour Judge Nicholas R Marston found there were a series of ‘systemic failures’ by Somerset County Council which meant the 19-year-old woman, known only as ‘P’ for legal reasons and who was represented by Irwin Mitchell, instructed by the Official Solicitor as her litigation friend, was wrongly kept away from her family for over a year.

Irwin Mitchell says the case demonstrates the importance of ensuring all staff working within local authorities are given sufficient guidance and training about the Mental Capacity Act (MCA).

P, who has autism spectrum disorder and almost no verbal communication skills, was prevented by social services from returning to her family home in Yeovil in May last year following bruises to her chest being reported.

Despite teachers witnessing P’s violent behaviour on a school trip, including hitting herself in her chest area, social services did not carry out thorough investigations, instead concluding that it was ‘highly likely that P received significant injury from someone or something other than herself’ and took the decision that she should not return home following a stay in respite care.

P was then kept in a respite facility in Yeovil for 6 months and sedated with medication despite her family’s pleas for her to be allowed home. The local authority then moved P to an assessment and treatment unit after it was accepted that the respite placement was unsuitable, where she remained against her family’s wishes until the case was heard by the Court of Protection.

During a 10-day court hearing in Bristol in May this year, the judge found that a ‘competently conducted investigation by social services into the bruises would have swiftly concluded that there was not sufficient evidence to conclude P’s safety was at risk by returning her home.’

In addition, the Court criticised the local authority for failing to act in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act, for failing to bring the matter to the Court of Protection for a hearing on the matter for six months and for failing to consult with the family and inform them that they could make an application.

In total, P was kept in residential homes with restricted access to her family for nearly a year. The first facility was found to be inadequate to meet her complex care needs and she was sedated with medication without consulting her parents, which was also unlawful.

Somerset County Council admitted that P had been deprived of her liberty and apologised to the family for its ‘procedurally inappropriate and unlawful’ actions.

Following the 10-day hearing, the judge concluded that it was in P’s best interests that she was returned to the family home and that Somerset County Council had illustrated a failure to respect the human rights of both P and her family.

The full judgment is available here.
Categories :
  • News
Tags :
CourtofProtection2
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Load more comments
Comment by from