A residential placement commissioned by the LA and/or a clinical commissioning group is invariably in an ‘incapacitated’ person’s ‘best interests’.
The Court of Protection is not given a choice of placement, it is forced to rubber stamp the executive’s decision.
And it doesn’t need to be proved that this placement is in an individual’s best interests.
The Court of Protection does not explore a placement’s previous outcomes, nor insist on a trial period.
Thomas Rawnsley’s ‘best interests’ were served by living in the newly built Kingdom House, 80 miles from his family, where he died at 20.
COP ordered the placement without even explanation as to how Cambian intended to cope with Thomas’ trauma , autism and Downs Syndrome .
The court his family nor Thomas were given any other alternatives.
And the Court of Protection will not interferewith a care provider’s services as shown in N v ACCG and Others [ 2017] UKSC 22
View original post 1,192 more words