Knowsley Health and Wellbeing
A partnership between Knowsley NHS Primary Care Trust
and Knowsley Council Directorate of Wellbeing Services
The Mental Capacity Act 2005 Deprivation of
Liberty Safeguards (DOLS)
Policy and Procedures
Authors
- Linda Crawley and Vince Williams
Date
- April 2009
Review Date
- April 2010
1
Contents
Policy Control Information
………………………
Page 3
Introduction
………………………
Page 5
Definitions/Glossary
………………………
Page 6
Principles and Process
………………………
Page 7
Further Information
………………………
Page 10
Appendix (1) DOLS Overview ………………………
Page 12
Appendix (2) 3rd Party Letter ………………………
Page 13
………………...
Page 14
Appendix (4) DOLS checklist ………………………
Page 15
Appendix (3) IMCA referral form
2
POLICY DOCUMENT CONTROL PAGE
TITLE
Title:
Mental Capacity Act Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards Policy and Procedures
Version: 1
Date: April 2009
HCC
STANDARDS
LINK
QUALITY
CONTROL
REVIEW
PROFESSIONAL GROUP
APPROVAL
ORIGINATOR
SUPERSEDES
Reference Number:
Supersedes:
N/A
Description of Amendments:
Originated by: Linda Crawley
Designation:
Head of Modernisation and Improvement
Department / Service: Health and Wellbeing
Referred for approval by: Linda Crawley
Referred to (insert name of group/s): Mental Capacity Act Local Implementation
Network
Date of Referral: 26th March 2009
Approved by:
Date:
Executive Signature:
Review Date: April 2010
Responsibility of: Linda Crawley
Date sent to Clinical Governance: April 2009
Quality Control Check Completed:
Link to HCC Standards Reference:
Legislative framework to protect the interests of people who lack the mental capacity to
consent to care/treatment. Part of the responsibility for safeguarding adults monitored
by the Care Quality Commission
3
POLICY CONTROL PAGE (2) Continued
Training Programme/awareness raising required to fully implement policy: Yes x  No  N/A.
If N/A please state why:
Training and awareness raising programme is ongoing. Staff across PCT/DWS and partner agencies
have attended events plus e learning packages are available for independent study.
Training/ Awareness Raising to take place on: Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty
Safeguards
Date: various
Provided by: MCA/DOLS LEAD – Vince Williams
The Policy will be posted on Knowsley Council and NHS Knowsley intranet & internet:
Date: April 2009
Electronic or Hard Copy Circulation List:
Policy will be circulated by both electronic and hard copy
4
Knowsley Health and Wellbeing
Mental Capacity Act 2005
Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS)
Policy and Procedure
1.
INTRODUCTION
The Mental Capacity Act 2005 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (MCA DOLS) provide a
legal framework to prevent unlawful deprivation of liberty occurring. They protect
vulnerable people aged 18 or over when receiving care and/or treatment in a registered
hospital or care home and who lack the capacity to consent but may need to be
deprived of their liberty in their own best interests to protect them from harm.
It is important to understand that the MCA DOLS are not about detention or compulsory
treatment under the Mental Health Act 1983. The 1983 Act is primarily about people who
are diagnosed as having a mental health problem and who need to be detained or
treated for their own well-being or to protect other people. The majority of people who will
require the protection of the MCA DOLS are those with more severe learning disabilities,
older people with the range of dementias or people with neurological conditions such as
brain injuries.
NHS Knowsley and Knowsley Council are responsible for administering the MCA DOLS
at a local level and are defined as supervisory bodies. This guidance is written so that
staff working for a supervisory body understand their legal responsibilities. It should be
read in conjunction with Knowsley’s own policy and procedures for the Mental Capacity
Act 2005 and Safeguarding Vulnerable Adults. Managers working in hospitals and care
homes and people appointed as relevant person’s representatives will have other roles
and responsibilities under the new DOLS system which comes into force on 1 April,
2009.
2.
THE CODE OF PRACTICE
The Deprivation of Liberty Code of Practice has statutory force and practitioners need to
demonstrate that they follow this recording all assessments and decisions made on
behalf of any incapacitated adult.
This Guidance is based on but not intended to replace the legal framework in Schedule
A1 of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the accompanying MCA DOLS Code of Practice.
This can be downloaded at:
www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance
/DH_085476. Reference to the relevant paragraphs in the Code is made in brackets.
3.
TRAINING
Knowsley Health and Wellbeing Workforce Development prospectus has details of
further specialist training on the Mental Capacity Act. This will be of particular interest to
those who may be expected to make decisions on behalf of any incapacitated adult.
The Safeguarding Adults Unit can also arrange access to e-learning packages that
cover, separately: Mental Capacity Act 2005, Safeguarding Adults and Deprivation of
Liberty Safeguards by contacting 0151 443 3345.
5
4.
IMPORTANT DEFINITIONS
Key terms used in the MCA DOLS legislation include:

Supervisory body refers to Primary Care Trusts (for hospitals) and Local
Authorities (for care homes)

Managing authority is the person or body with management responsibility for the
hospital or care home in which a person is being, or may be, deprived of liberty

Standard authorisation permits lawful deprivation of liberty and is issued by a
supervisory body

Urgent authorisation permits lawful deprivation of liberty and is issued by a
managing authority for a short temporary period – usually up to seven days. A
simultaneous application for a standard authorisation must be made to the
supervisory body in any urgent authorisation

Relevant person is the person (aged18 years and over) who may need to be
deprived of liberty.

Relevant person’s representative is the person who represents the relevant
person which may be a family member, friend, or, where none is available, a paid
representative. The paid representative will be appointed by the supervisory body
and is likely to be an advocate or an IMCA. The representative has important
duties and rights see chapter 7 DOLS Code of Practice

Best interests assessor is the person who assesses whether or not deprivation
of liberty is in the person’s best interests, is necessary to prevent harm to the
person and is a proportionate response to the likelihood and seriousness of that
harm

Advance decision (ADRT) is a decision to refuse specified medical treatment
made in advance by a person who has capacity to do so. The decision will then
apply at a future time when that person lacks capacity to consent to, or refuse, the
specified medical treatment. Specific rules apply to advance decisions to refuse
life sustaining treatment. See chapter 9 of Code of Practice. An ADRT cannot
request specific treatment; it can only refuse.

Donee of lasting power of attorney (Health & Welfare or Property & Finance) is
the person appointed under a lasting power of attorney who has the legal right to
make decisions within the scope of their authority on behalf of the person (the
donor) who made them lasting power of attorney

Independent Mental Capacity Advocate (IMCA) is a person who provides
support and representation for a person who lacks capacity to make specific
decisions in certain defined circumstances. The IMCA was established by the
Mental Capacity Act and has additional powers to that of a generic advocacy
service.

Deprivation of liberty will depend on the circumstances of each individual case.
A number of previous court cases give some indication of situations where
6
deprivation of liberty has occurred. Various factors must be taken into account,
such as whether:
 the person has disproportionate restrictions placed upon them
 carers or relatives want the person to be discharged and are refused
 staff have total control over the person’s care and movement
 staff control who the person can see and what kind of treatment they have
 the person has lost all autonomy.
A restriction as opposed to a deprivation of liberty is appropriate when it is used to
prevent harm to the person who lacks capacity and it is a proportionate response
to the likelihood and seriousness of harm. However, the difference is often one of
degree or intensity. For example, restraint preventing a person from leaving a care
home or hospital on their own because there is a risk that they would try to cross a
road in a dangerous way is likely to be seen as a proportionate restriction to
prevent the person from coming to harm. However to lock somebody in a care
home or hospital for longer periods and not allow them outside because of the
risks, could amount to a deprivation of liberty.
For more information about deprivation of liberty, read Chapter 2 of the MCA
DOLS Code of Practice.

5.
Capacity to consent refers to a person’s mental capacity to agree to care
arrangements or treatment. Under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, a person is said
to lack capacity if they are unable to understand and make a particular decision at
the time it needs to be made. There are lots of reasons why a person may lack
capacity. Some are short term (for example, they are unconscious) while others
are long term (for example, they have dementia). Capacity can also fluctuate
depending on health condition. So it is important that the capacity decision is
made on current factors. The usual tests for capacity is can someone
understand, communicate, retain and weigh-up. Chapter 4 of the MCA Code of
Practice has more information and/or the Checklist in Knowsley’s own MCA policy
and procedures.
PRINCIPLES
Deprivation of liberty should be avoided whenever possible. It cannot to be used as a
form of punishment, or for the convenience of professionals, carers, or anyone else.
MCA DOLS ensure that it can only take place when it is in the best interests of the
person concerned and when it is authorised by a supervisory body following careful
assessments – see below.
The relevant person has legal protection, including the right to:




An independent representative to act on their behalf
The support of an Independent Mental Capacity Advocate (IMCA)
Have their deprivation of liberty reviewed and monitored on a regular basis
Challenge their deprivation of liberty in the Court of Protection.
The deprivation of liberty safeguards are in addition to, and do not replace, other
safeguards in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). The decisions made and actions
taken for a person who is subject to an authorisation must fulfil the requirements of the
Act, in particular the five statutory principles that underpin the legislation. These are:
7
1. A person must be assumed to have capacity unless it is established that they lack
capacity.
2. A person is not to be treated as unable to make a decision unless all practicable
steps to help him / her to do so have been taken without success.
3. A person is not to be treated as unable to make a decision merely because he/she
makes an unwise decision.
4. An act done or a decision made, under this Act for or on behalf of a person who
lacks capacity must be done, or made, in his/her best interest.
5. Before the act is done, or the decision is made, regard must be had to whether the
purpose for which it is needed can be as effectively achieved in a way that is less
restrictive of the persons rights and freedom of action
6.
THE MCA DOLS PROCESS
An overview is given in the form of a flowchart in the appendix (1)
6.1
AUTHORISATION
The MCA DOLS make it lawful for a person to be deprived of their liberty, based on a
rigorous, standardised assessment and authorisation process. Hospitals and care homes
(managing authority) must apply to their Primary Care Trust or local council, the
(supervisory body) for ‘authorisation’ if they believe they can only provide adequate
care for a person in circumstances that amount to a deprivation of liberty. All applications
will be received initially by Knowsley Access Team, who will check that the form has
been completed in full, enter key data to SWIFT and pass to the Knowsley Safeguarding
Adults Unit. There are standard forms to be completed available from the Department of
Health website –
http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGui
dance/DH_089772
There are two types of authorisation: standard and urgent:

Standard authorisations will be the most common type, applied for in advance of a
person being deprived of liberty when this is known as likely to happen, and only
after rigorous care planning methods have indicated that less restrictive measures
cannot meet the person’s needs (only the supervisory body may do this). The
six statutory assessment requirements (listed below) must be met. A standard
authorisation can last for up to 12 months, but deprivation of liberty should last
only for as long as is necessary.

Urgent authorisations can be issued where there is a need to deprive someone of
their liberty immediately in their own best interests to protect them from harm or if
particular treatment is needed urgently (the managing authority must do this
initially). In this situation, the hospital or care home can issue itself an urgent
authorisation. It must apply for a standard authorisation at the same time and the
assessments must complete within seven calendar days. If there are exceptional
reasons for doing so, an urgent authorisation can be extended by up to seven
days by the supervisory body.
8
6.2
ASSESSMENT
On receipt of an application from a hospital, care home or a third party, Knowsley’s
DOLS co-ordinator in the Safeguarding Adults Unit will immediately initiate an
assessment and commission the necessary qualifying tests, keeping clear and
comprehensive records. There are strict timescales for completing the assessment
process – a maximum of 21 calendar days for handling standard authorisations and
seven days for urgent.
Assessments must be undertaken to establish whether the relevant person meets six
qualifying requirements:
 Age: to assess if the person being deprived is aged 18 or over.
 No refusals: to ensure that the proposed treatment does not conflict with a valid
decision already made by an attorney or deputy on the person’s behalf, or with a
decision made in advance by the relevant person themselves.
 Mental capacity: to confirm whether the person being deprived of liberty lacks
capacity to consent to the arrangements made for their care and treatment
 Mental health: to check whether the person being deprived of liberty is suffering
from a mental disorder within the meaning of the Mental Health Act 1983
 Eligibility: to rule out any application of the Mental Health Act 1983
 Best interests: firstly to establish whether the proposed care plan would deprive
the person of their liberty, and secondly to confirm whether it is:
– in the best interests of the person to be subject to the authorisation
– necessary in order to prevent them from coming to harm
– a proportionate response to the likelihood of them suffering harm and the
seriousness of that harm.
A minimum of two different suitably qualified assessors, one of whom must be a doctor,
are required for an authorisation. The DOLS co-ordinator will notify all parties of the
decision and subsequent actions using the relevant standard forms.
If any of the assessments find that the relevant person does not meet the qualifying
requirements, a deprivation of liberty authorisation cannot be issued.
If the requirements of all six assessments are met, then an authorisation can be granted
to deprive the relevant person of their liberty to protect them from harm provided this is in
their best interests and there is no less restrictive alternative. The authorisation will be
issued in writing by the supervisory body to the managing authority. It will be for as short
a time as possible and will include the purpose of the deprivation. A relevant person’s
representative (RPR) must then be appointed as soon as possible by the Supervisory
Body. The maximum authorisation is 12 months and it is always subject to review or
suspension at any time throughout the duration.
A deprivation of liberty checklist is available on page 15 to help determine whether a
deprivation of liberty is occurring or is likely to occur.
7.
OTHER PROCESSES
Advocacy
It is essential that the person for whom the application is being made has someone to
support them. The managing authority must tell the supervisory body if there is no family
member or non-professional carer to support an individual through the assessment
process. The supervisory body must then appoint an Independent Mental Capacity
9
Advocate (IMCA) under section 39A of the Act, to help them. If the relevant person’s
representative is a family member or friend they can access the support of an IMCA via
section 39D of the Act if needed. There is a referral form in the appendices.
Third parties
If a third party believes that there is a deprivation of liberty without authorisation, they
should notify the hospital or care home concerned. A third party could be a care worker,
social worker, nurse or occupational therapist for example who becomes aware that an
unlawful deprivation of liberty is occurring. If the issue is not resolved informally, the
notifying party can approach Knowsley Access Team directly. A standard letter is
available – see appendices. On receipt, the supervisory body will appoint a best
interests assessor to carry out an assessment to determine whether a deprivation of
liberty is occurring and if a person’s care arrangements need to be changed. A record
will be kept of all third party notifications and the actions taken.
Residency dispute
If there is any doubt about where the relevant person is ordinarily resident, the Local
Authority or Primary Care Trust that receives the original request must act as the
supervisory body until resolved.
Reviews
Supervisory bodies are responsible for carrying out reviews and at any time that seems
appropriate. Reviews must take place at request of the relevant person, their RPR, a
section 39 IMCA or the managing authority and also if there has been a change in the
relevant person’s situation. On receipt of a request, the Best Interests Assessor will
decide which, if any, of the qualifying requirements should be reviewed. Outcomes will be
recorded and all interested parties informed.
All health and social care practitioners must be aware of and identify any potential
deprivation of liberty when assessing, reviewing and providing care plan arrangements
for any adults in their care. This applies to the usual review processes in their own area
alongside the statutory requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
Termination and suspension
If a standard authorisation comes to an end with no replacement, or, a review concludes
that it should be terminated, the relevant person should cease to be deprived of their
liberty immediately. Any deprivation of liberty can only last for a maximum period of 12
months (or less than this if the person’s circumstances are likely to alter). Care plans will
need to reflect that change and all interested parties informed. If the hospital or care
home believes that the deprivation should continue, they must apply to the supervisory
body for a new authorisation using the appropriate forms. It is not possible to simply
renew.
Authorisations can be suspended for up to 28 days under exceptional circumstances
such as the relevant person is detained under the Mental Health Act 1983. The
supervisory body is responsible for authorising that suspension and re-instatement on
application from the managing authority.
10
8.
FURTHER INFORMATION
The following websites have helpful information:
http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/SocialCare/Deliveringadultsocialcare/MentalCapacity/MentalCa
pacityActDeprivationofLibertySafeguards/index.htm Department of Health introduction to
Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards including the Code of Practice and Standard Forms
http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGui
dance/DH_095895 a guide for family, friends and unpaid carers
http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGui
dance/DH_094347 a guide for primary care trusts and local authorities
http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGui
dance/DH_094348 a guide for hospitals and care homes
http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGui
dance/DH_094346 a guide for relevant representatives
http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGui
dance/DH_095891 a guide to the Independent Mental Capacity Advocate Service
http://www.publicguardian.gov.uk/index.htm Office of the Public Guardian
http://www.knowsley.gov.uk/families/social-care-and-health-service/adults-and-olderpeople/safeguarding-adults.aspx safeguarding pages for Knowsley council
Or contact the Knowsley MCA DOLS Lead Vince Williams or Co-ordinator Crispin Evans
based in the Knowsley Safeguarding Adults Unit – telephone 0151 443 3346.
APPENDICES:
(1) Flowchart Mental Capacity Act/DOLS process
(2) Suggested letter from third party to supervisory body
(3) IMCA referral form
(4) DOL screening checklist for Managing Authorities (hospitals and care homes)
11
Appendix (1)
Overview of the deprivation of liberty safeguards process
Hospital or care home managers identify
those at risk of deprivation of liberty and
request authorisation from supervisory
body
In urgent situations, a
hospital or care home can
give an urgent
authorisation for seven
days while obtaining a
standard authorisation.
Assessments commissioned by
supervisory body. IMCA
instructed for anyone without
representation
Age
assessment
Mental health
assessment
Mental capacity
assessment
Best interests
assessment
Any
assessment
says no
Request for
authorisation
declined
No refusals
assessment
Eligibility
assessment
All
assessments
support
authorisation
Best interests
assessor
recommends
person to be
appointed as
representative
Best interests
assessor recommends
period for which
deprivation of liberty
should be authorised
Authorisation
expires and
managing
authority
request further
authorisations
Authorisation is given
and person’s
representative appointed
Person or their
representative
applies to Court of
Protection, which
has powers to,
terminate
authorisation or
vary conditions
Authorisation
implemented by
managing authority
Managing authority
requests review
because circumstance
change
Person or their
representative
requests review
Review
12
Appendix (2)
Deprivation of Liberty Letter 2
Letter to supervisory body concerning unauthorised deprivation of liberty
Sender’s address Contact telephone
number Date
Name and address of supervisory body
Dear Sir/Madam
Re [name of person/resident]
I am writing to you about the above-named person who is accommodated in [Name and
address of hospital or care home].
I am the person’s [state relationship or interest in the matter, e.g. ‘child’, ‘friend’,
‘representative’, etc]
On [enter date], I wrote to/spoke with the managing authority of the [name of
hospital or care home]. I informed them that it appeared to me that this person
lacked capacity to consent to the arrangements made for their care or treatment
and was subject to an unauthorised deprivation of liberty. I asked them to give an
urgent deprivation of liberty authorisation and to request a standard authorisation,
in accordance with the provisions of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
My reasons for believing that this person is subject to an unauthorised deprivation of
liberty are that …. [briefly state reasons]
I understand that the managing authority has not requested a standard
authorisation.
I am therefore writing to make a formal request that you now decide whether or not
this person is subject to an unauthorised deprivation of liberty.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Yours faithfully
Signature
Name of sender in block capitals
Notes
The use of this letter is not mandatory. However, any oral or written request should
include the information in bold in the above letter.
13
Appendix (3)
Northwest Advocacy Services
Independent Mental Capacity Advocacy (IMCA) Referral Form
Client's Name
DOB:
NHS Number
Address/Location
Telephone
Referral for
Others Involved
Capacity
Serious Medical Treatment
Yes only tick one of these four reasons for referral
Change in Residence
Yes 
Adult Protection
Yes 
Care Review
Yes 
Any Family?
Yes 
No 
Unsure 
Any Friends?
Yes 
No 
Unsure 
Has Capacity Been Determined?
Yes 
No 
Unsure 
If yes, do they have capacity?
Yes 
No 
Unsure 
Decision specifics
Referrer
Decision Maker
Contact Details
Referrer’s TEL
Referrer’s FAX
Referrer’s E-mail
Date Sent to NWAS: ___________________________
(Please clarify whether Contact details are for referrer or decision maker)
Please fax or email completed form to Northwest Advocacy Services
(2 Kipling Crescent, Widnes, WA8 7BT)
Fax 0151 422 0828
e-mail imca@nwas,org.uk
Tel: 0845 680 0513
14
Appendix (4)
Deprivation of Liberty: screening checklist
This screening checklist is only a guide and should be used in conjunction with the Mental
Capacity Act 2005 main Code of Practice and Mental Capacity Act 2005 Deprivation of Liberty
Safeguards Code of Practice alongside the guidance provided in the Knowsley Council and
PCT Policy.
Mental Capacity Assessments should always be documented, with whom the “Decision Maker”
is and how the Best Interest decisions were made.
The following questions should be considered about each adult in a care home or hospital ward
who does not have the capacity to give informed consent to being there. If it is obvious that the
answer to every question is no, the adult is unlikely to be being deprived of their liberty.
If you believe a potential deprivation of liberty is occurring or might take place within the next 28
days after using this checklist then you as the Managing Authority (Care Home or Hospital)
should make a request for authorisation of a deprivation of liberty by using the Department of
Health “standard” authorisation form to the Knowsley Access Team (details below).
If you are a care manager or health care professional using this checklist as part of your review
and you identify any concerns that a Deprivation of Liberty may be taking place you should
firstly raise this with the home/hospital concerned. If you are not satisfied with their response
you should complete Appendix 2 and make a referral for a Deprivation of Liberty assessment
Either by Fax on: 0151443 4308 or by email to knowsley.accessteam@knowsley.gov.uk
How the person was admitted to the care home or hospital
1. Was force or sedatives used because the person was resisting
being admitted?
Yes
No
This does not include the use of benign force, such as gently guiding
someone by the arm.
2. Was the person deceived to make sure they co-operated? For
instance were they misled into believing that they would return
home the next day?
Yes
No
3. Did the person’s relatives, or carers who live with the person,
object to them being admitted?
Yes
No
Current arrangements
4. Is the person sedated to prevent them leaving?
Yes
No
Use of sedatives does not in itself mean that a person is deprived of
liberty – it is only relevant if the purpose is to prevent the person
from leaving the establishment.
15
5. Does the person make persistent or purposeful attempts to
leave, which are prevented by means of force or a locked door?
Yes
No
A locked door does not constitute deprivation on its own, even if its
purpose is to prevent residents from wandering. Likewise for the use
of benign force, such as gently guiding someone by the arm to
return them when they are wandering. This test is met only if the
person’s attempts to leave are persistent and/or purposeful.
6. Is force being used to treat the person when they are resisting,
other than in an emergency?
Yes
No
Use of benign force to administer medication, or to feed or dress
someone, does not deprive someone of liberty. Emergencies could
include disturbed, threatening or self harming behaviour.
7. Have relatives or carers asked for the person to be discharged
to their care, and been refused?
Yes
No
8. Have relatives or carers been refused access to the person, or
had severe restrictions put on their access?
Yes
No
Reasonable restrictions on visiting hours etc. are not relevant.
9. Has the person been prevented from spending time with the
people who matter to them?
Yes
No
This would for instance include preventing the person from spending
time with friends inside or outside the home/ward. It would not
include guiding the person away from casual acquaintances who
appear to be abusing or exploiting the person, or reasonable
restrictions on the times when the person can socialise with friends,
for instance because of the pattern of the establishment's daily
routine.
10. Does the way the person’s care is organised severely restrict
what they can do in other ways?
Yes
No
An example of a severe restriction would be placing the person for a
large proportion of their waking time in a position which prevents
them from moving (e.g. using furniture which they cannot get up
from). It would not be a severe restriction to use furniture designed
to keep the person safe, which they cannot get up from unaided, if
they are usually able to get help to get out of it when they show a
persistent or purposeful desire to do so.
11. Has the person’s access to the community been severely
restricted because of concerns about public safety?
Yes
No
It is not deprivation of liberty to require someone to be escorted on
trips out of the care home/hospital, if this is in the interests of their
own safety rather than that of others, even if this means that the
person is sometimes temporarily not permitted to leave.
16
Name of person:
___________________________
SWIFT number if they have one:
___________________________
Address:
Date of Birth:
___________________________________________
___________________________
17