Mental Capacity Act 2005

PRACTICE ANALYSIS (3,500 Words)

•Intended Learning Outcomes (ILOs) 1, 3 and 5.

•1. An applied knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and related Codes of Practice

•3. The skills necessary to obtain, evaluate and analyse complex evidence and differing views and to weigh these appropriately in decision-making

•5. The ability to use reflection and critical analysis to examine their own practice with service users and families where issues of mental capacity and human rights are central to care-planning.

Chose a case that you have worked with, are working with or are supervising someone working

•Doesn’t have to be a dep. lib. case

•Qualification is that individual has a question mark re capacity (note doesn’t have to result in a finding of a lack of capacity)

•Reflect on the case paying attention to the ILOs:

Explain how the law worked to help the individual

•What aspects of the law were relevant: e.g. five principles; assessing capacity; best interests decisions; LPA; ADRT; COP; s44; IMCAs

•Professional codes of practice together with reference to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 Code of Practice Define the context of the piece of work and integrate research, theory, law and policy into the practice analysis. Critical evaluation and analysis of the practice in question is essential for this programme

•Needs to be more than just reciting the law – how was it applied in your case?

•Needs to be more than a description of events – analyse! •What? Where? Why? When? How? Theories? Models of practice? Research? Outcomes? Future work? •What have you learned about yourself? Your practice?

PLEASE USE CASE STUDY BELOW

Mrs. Bell (pseudonym) was 80 years of age; she was admitted to hospital with acute confusion, she had a previous diagnosis of Vascular Dementia and she presented with short term memory loss. Prior to her admission to hospital Mrs. Bell lived alone and had a care package consisting of three calls with one Carer per day. On admission, Mrs. Bell was diagnosed with urinary tract infection (UTI) and delirium. After weeks of treatment, Mrs. Bell was deemed medically optimized for discharge according to the physical attributes, however, her confusion and delirium had partially resolved, her return to her flat was deemed unsafe by the Physiotherapist, Occupational Therapist and other professionals who were involved in Mrs. Bell’s care. My involvement started when I was assigned to Mrs. Bell as her hospital Social Worker, my role was to support with a safe discharge from hospital, this included completing assessments, Care Act assessment under Care Act 2014 to identify Mrs. Bell’s eligible care needs and arrange appropriate care and support services to meet identified eligible needs, risk assessment to identify potential risks and arrange services to minimize the risks and mental capacity assessment to determine if Mrs. Bell is able to contribute or make informed decision regarding her discharge destination.