The bill to replace the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) with the Liberty Protection Safeguards (LPS) has finally been approved by the House of Lords after peers made significant changes to the government’s original proposals.
These are some of the concerns raised and challenged by peers following the original amendment bill.
The significant role given to care home managers under LPS was challenged by Peers who questioned whether care home managers would have the required skills and knowledge to carry out what would be, in effect, the responsibilities performed under DoLS by BIAs, who have specialist training in the MCA.
The government brought forward amendments to give local authorities the option of giving these responsibilities to the care home manager or undertaking the responsibilities themselves. This would act as a check to ensure that the care home was suitable to oversee the process.
Under the original proposal managers would also have had the responsibility to alert local authorities if they judged an IMCA was required worried peers, who warned that care home managers would act as gatekeepers and people entitled to advocates would not have access to them.
“Unsound mind” term removed
The bill was changed so that managers would no longer be responsible for notifying a local authority if an IMCA should be appointed. Instead, the amended bill specifies IMCAs would be automatically appointed where there was no appropriate person.
“Unsound mind” terminology has now been removed following the governments response to criticism that the term was outdated and stigmatising. The amendments use the term the person must have a mental disorder bringing it in line with the Mental Health act 1983.
The bill was due to have its first debate in the House of Commons on the 18th December 2018. This has been put back to some time in 2019 and it is unclear as to when. Follow progress of the bill