Spotlight
Court of Protection Practice 2024
'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 articlesrss feeds
New Family Presiding Judges Appointed
The Lady Chief Justice, with the concurrence of the Lord Chancellor, has announced the appointment of two Family Presiding Judges.Mr Justice MacDonald has been appointed for a period of four years,...
Victims given greater access to justice through legal aid reform
Innocent people who have suffered miscarriages of justice, personal harm or injury are among those who will benefit from upcoming changes to legal aid means testing coming into effect this...
Obligations and responsibilities – the mosquito in the bedroom
Stephen Wildblood KC, 3PB BarristersLuke Nelson, 3PB BarristersWhatever happened to ‘obligations and responsibilities’ in s 25(2) MCA 1973?  Why is it that all of the other words in...
A rare order for a child in utero
Mary Welstead, CAP Fellow Harvard Law School; Visiting Professor in Family law University of BuckinghamIn 2023, Kettering NHS Trust applied for an anticipatory declaration for a child...
Stranded spouses: an overview
Mani Singh Basi, Barrister, 4PB, author of A Practical Guide to Stranded Spouses in Family Law ProceedingsThis article provides an overview of the issues that often arise in cases...
View all articles
Authors

The (not so?) great confinement (£)

Sep 29, 2018, 21:46 PM
family law, Cheshire West, Winterbourne View, deprivation of liberty, DOLS, threshold
Title : The (not so?) great confinement (£)
Slug : the-not-so-great-confinement
Meta Keywords : family law, Cheshire West, Winterbourne View, deprivation of liberty, DOLS
Canonical URL : http://www.jordanpublishing.co.uk/practice-areas/private-client/news_and_comment/the-not-so-great-confinement
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Check Copyright Text : No
Date : Mar 24, 2015, 03:08 AM
Article ID : 108863
Neil Allen, Barrister, 39 Essex Street and Lecturer, University of Manchester

As a result of the Supreme Court’s decision in P (By His Litigation Friend the Official Solicitor) v Cheshire West and Chester Council and Another; P and Q (By Their Litigation Friend the Official Solicitor) v Surrey County Council [2014] UKSC 19, [2014] COPLR 313 (‘Cheshire West’), we are presently witnessing something very unique, something historical. And that is the mass authorisation of deprivation of liberty of a significant proportion of the disabled population. Tens of millions of pounds are being diverted from health and social care budgets to authorise deprivations of liberty on an industrial scale. Up and down the country – as Art 5 ECHR takes hold – an additional layer of legal procedures are now required to oversee health and social care. We are in the throes of what might be called a great confinement.

Whether the Supreme Court was right to lower the threshold for deprivation of liberty beyond that presently recognised by the European Court of Human Rights remains to be seen. No one will ultimately know unless and until
The full version of this article appears in issue 1 of 2015 of Elder Law Journal.

If you subscribe to the journal please click here to read the full article.

For details on how you can subscribe to Elder Law Journal or for any offers, please contact a member of our sales team: Tel 0117 918 1555, or email: sales.manager@jordanpublishing.co.uk


Categories :
  • Articles
Tags :
key
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Load more comments
Comment by from