X v Finland – Are we in trouble?

Please read It appears UK may be acting illegally per se in enforcing non voluntary mental treatment and is in any event by doing so is in breach of HRA.

Our present system gives total control to for profit private hospitals the use of which are increasing- PRIORY/CYGNET, to decide the most profitable treatment ,and that is to detain for as long as possible and enforce as many drugs as possible without regard to outcomes, patient or their family.

This must stop. it is also bleeding the NHS dry of public money- 20% of whole NHS budget, to make profit and injure.

Mental Health and Mental Capacity Law

The decision of the European Court of Human Rights in X v Finland (Application no. 34806/04; judgment of 3 July 2012) makes significant new law concerning the provision of mandatory psychiatric treatment. It is at best highly doubtful that the approach in the Mental Health Act 1983, where compulsory treatment flows from detention automatically and with limited distinct procedural and substantive safeguards, is consistent with Article 8 of the ECHR.

View original post 1,817 more words

#RightfulLives – all the court judgments upholding the human rights of autistic and / or learning disabled people

This post by Steve Broach, highlights the only, very few cases were actions for breach of a disabled’s human rights have been successful.

What must be remembered, is that under Liberty Safeguards, it is the executive, who will decide ie LA/NHS, if a person has capacity and MCA invoked and liberty removed and once this is established a disabled’s decisions as to contact, residence, and all care can be made by the Commissioning LA/NHS without regard to a court hearing let alone Human Rights.

Already, as seen by these cases, freestanding HR actions are rare and in practice almost impossible, as Legal AID is rare, and all bar one are for ‘proportional’ interference in a human right, so the chances  losing great, and with that the biggest disincentive -the payment of the huge bankrupting costs of the otherside’s lawyers, bankruptcy and homelessness of litigant.

It must also be remembered, that such actions mean the Courts must not, as they are not, be interpreting the MCA in accordance with the HRA, which they are obliged by law to do.

And as the House of Lords Review showed 3 years ago not applying the MCA as drafted as this provides that the wishes of an incapacitated must so far as possible be taken into consideration and capacity assessments must relate to a specific decision only when that decision needs to be made in an incapacitated’s best interests.
If, as already shown, COP is ignoring MCA and HRA, what hope is there for the disabled when the executive take over under LIBERTY SAFEGUARDS and how then can a freestanding HRA action be taken, as presumably an impossible action for judicial review of the executive decision must be brought first , lawyers found paid for and bankrupting costs risked.
So effectively, the disabled and their families human rights can effectively be ignored and are unenforceable, and under Liberty Safeguards, this is set to get much much worse as MCA and HRA are in  the total control of the executive.


The #RightfulLives online exhibition launched today (24 September 2018). It is an incredible collection of the voices and views of autistic and / or learning disabled people and their families, grouped under the key Articles from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) (.pdf). The ECHR is of course incorporated (given force in domestic law) by the Human Rights Act 1998. The courts are also increasingly interpreting the EHCR rights by reference to the other key international conventions, including here the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).

I was struck by the following section of the intro to #RightfulLives – ‘The idea for the exhibition came about through a conversation about how the legal framework of the Human Rights Act seems to barely touch the lives of people with learning disabilities. Since then we have only been able to find three published successful court…

View original post 1,684 more words

Separate representation of a child – a thorny problem!

Remember, we now have effectively LA SW outsourced private, for profit, monopoly child protection services,. making huge profits, effectively unregulated, legally gaining their power by supposedly acting in the child’s best ‘welfare ‘ under much Blairite/Cameron amended Children Act, but as yet no voice of the child, as he is represented by a state appointed and paid guardian via CAFCASS again outsourced to private and a court rubber stamping for private profit decisions .

So here we have in this case rarely, the voice of the child for whom all this process and public money is being spent  and profit made.

Surely it must be listened to ? IF we really want child protection and not just the rubber stamping of people into for profit foster care and adoption and their harvesting by our state authorities and subversion of our laws and agencies ?  via Separate representation of a child – a thorny problem!

At the trial of eight Asian men accused of sexual abuse Sheffield Crown Court heard that a girl fell pregnant at the age of 14 and said she felt her childhood had been ‘snatched away.’


Mohammed Imran Ali Akhtar, 37, of Rotherham, denies four counts of indecent assault, one of supplying a controlled drug, one of rape, one of procuring a girl under 21 for unlawful sexual intercourse with another, one of aiding and abetting a rape and one of sexual assault.

GW: Akhtar deserted the girl when she bore him a son and also abused her sister.  Big Creep now wearing a mask to hide his face – A coward to boot. Good Lord.

Tanweer Ali, 37, of Rotherham, denies two counts of indecent assault, two counts of rape and one of false imprisonment.

The girl claims the abuse she suffered between 1998 and 2001 began when she was just 13 years old. Her harrowing account was given in a video interview played at the trial of eight Asian men accused of sexual abuse of five girls over a five-year period from 1998 to…

View original post 341 more words

Some thoughts from the Lakes Read devastating effect of government changes to DOLs.

As the gov intend to change DOLs to liberty safeguards allowing LA/CCGS to remove a citizens liberty and all rights for life, handing them to for profit service providers read here



and further thoughts on the extensive discretion these bodies are given Some thoughts from the Lakes