Harvesting of the Disabled for Profit

A2013-09-20-15_36_14Parents of special educational needs children including those labelled autistic be warned this may be your fate.

The state are creating and labelling children as having a learning disability rather than a difficulty.

The renamed label is intellectual disability

See the latest number here.

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/schools-struggle-as-autism-diagnoses-rise-25-per-cent/

There are several databases used to share information illegally under Data Protection Act and s8 HRA to harvest children including future criminals.

http://databasemasterclass.blogspot.co.uk/

A learning (intellectual) ‘disability‘ is an impairment of mind, permanent, innate and evidenced by a low IQ  and is now  on the rise in the UK look at the statistics

http://chrishatton.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/the-disappeared.html?spref=tw.

Whereas a learning ‘difficulty‘ is not inate, and  can be because  a child is autistic ( learns differently), a late developer,  has poor teaching/assessment or taught in a second language,  such a child will have at least an average IQ. .

So if your child is a late developer autistic, has inadequate teaching he labelled and doomed to be a cash cow for life.

Unless he is part of the labelling state cabal.

Or in private education as they do not have the EHC system.

Education, Health, and Care Statements replaced Special Educational Needs statements last year.

Education, Health and Care statements unlike SEN, require social services to monitor your child’s ‘welfare’.

A school protection officer/ social worker will now be part of your life.

And,  your  child’s name secretly notified to  MASH- Multi Agency, Safeguarding Hub

Invasive IT Databases are being provided by CAPITA at 2016 see link.

In breach of HRA and Data Protection, to target families at risk in schools without their permission or even knowledge.

http://www.capita-one.co.uk/files/one/attachments/capita_one_-_product_brochure_-_one_analytics_-_apr16.pdf

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/working-together-to-safeguard-children-multi-agency-safeguarding-hubs

Your child will be in this system and by it watched covertly by every  agent of the state.

Read here the law and databases used to target the ‘disabled’ and their families by all agents of the state.

http://databasemasterclass.blogspot.co.uk/

And, despite the inherent difficulties of coping with an autistic./ different child.

Any bruise, scratch, dirt, swear  word, behaviour issue, sexualised behaviour, weight loss/gain,  head lice, old /inappropriate/clothing, emotional problem, parents relationship, lateness, rearrangement of meeting, attitude,comments, will be noted.

But you will be unaware you are under their microscope.

And have no right of reply or correction of their databases.

You will be impressed everyone  is taking such an interest.

Ignorant of why, your child really is, so ‘special’.

In June 2016 the government announced millions would be given to provide early intervention before crisis point.

This means those merely ‘at risk’ will also be targeted ie the poor, or those with relatives with special needs.

Education ‘pathways‘ are  used to harvest as many as possible to private eventually venture capital education and care .

As it is highly profitable- £200,000 a year financed by NHS (health), LA ( social),  D of E ( education )

.http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/business/acorn-care-acquires-pathway-care-9102370

All areas have similar Pathways as shown here for Nottingham

http://www.nottinghamshire.gov.uk/DMS/Document.ashx?czJKcaeAi5tUFL1DTL2UE4zNRBcoShgo=bSSB5VpG8vooSzX00hg%2FyPEcYUVxHpzqPrPXMJfEF%2BxGVODFeCYDfw%3D%3D&rUzwRPf%2BZ3zd4E7Ikn8Lyw%3D%3D=pwRE6AGJFLDNlh225F5QMaQWCtPHwdhUfCZ%2FLUQzgA2uL5jNRG4jdQ%3D%3D&mCTIbCubSFfXsDGW9IXnlg%3D%3D=hFflUdN3100%3D&kCx1AnS9%2FpWZQ40DXFvdEw%3D%3D=hFflUdN3100%3D&uJovDxwdjMPoYv%2BAJvYtyA%3D%3D=ctNJFf55vVA%3D&FgPlIEJYlotS%2BYGoBi5olA%3D%3D=NHdURQburHA%3D&d9Qjj0ag1Pd993jsyOJqFvmyB7X0CSQK=ctNJFf55vVA%3D&WGewmoAfeNR9xqBux0r1Q8Za60lavYmz=ctNJFf55vVA%3D&WGewmoAfeNQ16B2MHuCpMRKZMwaG1PaO=ctNJFf55vVA%3D

This intelligence gathering can be used to enforce any medication, therapy, schooling, or silence your complaints, via care proceeding or threat of them.

And serves as a file of historic ‘concerns’ of parental abuse/neglect/capacity, and/or future, Court of Protection LA evidence, that it is in your 18+ child’s ‘best interests’ to  be removed to community living for life, and your access limited and/or excluded.

Under EHC statements, your child can no longer attend a day school at 16, nor use overnight respite facilities.

His education, continues, by ad hoc, unaccountable, ‘independent’ living skills education packages

https://finolamoss.wordpress.com/2014/11/25/education-health-and-care-statements-emperors-clothes/

Consisting of agency workers,  escorting him to ad hoc skills facilities, overseen by a package boss.

Who, unknown to you are briefed on ‘your family’s file’ and will continue to monitor your child’s ‘welfare’.

Their goal,  is ‘independent’, away from home living and  is likely, to result, in a cash bonus, or, at least, more lucrative education packages from the LA.

‘Education’ will discuss leaving Mummy and Daddy, with your child.

Regardless of the effect or yours or his wishes.

And, you may not be told.

At 18, all services are funded by Adult Services.

Due to government cuts, these services are limited to assessment for state residential care for life- independent/ supported/community living,

A new private industry being bought up by monopoly venture capital US companies like Cygnet who own CAMBIAN with over 160 home sites.

http://www.local.gov.uk/documents/10180/5854661/Adult+social+care+funding+2014+state+of+the+nation+report/e32866fa-d512-4e77-9961-8861d2d93238.

This states,

‘The MODEL OF CARE, is increasingly one, which promotes INDEPENDENCE, and MANAGERS RISK.’ ( Code for ‘community’/supported living). 

Pressure, will be placed on the LA, to transfer adult funding to central government funding, which is only available, for residential Provision.

https://finolamoss.wordpress.com/2015/04/27/independent-living-disabled-penned-for-profit/

The LA’s standard  adult support plan criteria eludes to this in a question the Adult Social Worker must complete;

Does the plan promote independence including identifying goals that could result in reducing paid support within an agreed period ?

Your child because of his learning difficulty will be treated as a ‘child in need’ under s17 Childrens  Act.

Children in need meetings will be held  with the education package, and, safeguarding issues  raised,- hygiene, clothing, food, parenting, medical and dental attendance, physical, sexual emotional  abuse,  and, placed in social services core assessments.

As, the LA funding can only decide, it is in your child’s ‘best interests’, to live away from you, and, your access limited, little in your favour, will be recorded.

No matter, how unfairly skewed against you, even if factually incorrect, it appears impossible, to change these assessments, and, relay  the correct information to professionals, and agencies.

The difficultly posed by your child’s disability, or, the inadequacy of support will not be considered.

The LA commission the services, and, it is liable, if inadequate.

Your ability to safeguard, parent, clean your home, and not neglect your child, will be judged, as if your child, were not disabled.

And, any possible concerns, re cleanliness/safeguarding/emotional abuse, real, or contrived,

Will be reported back, by support workers.

Whilst, your child’s disability, will not be considered, in assessing your parental capacity.

It will be, grossly exaggerated, by the LA in  their assessments of him,

To enable the maximum to be claimed from public funds to be paid to private  independent/community living providers.

The worse your child’s behave becomes or is made to appear, the greater the income  the independent/supported living provider  can claim.

This also is used as evidence you are unable to cope, and it is  in his ‘best interests’ he to be removed.

If you do get support, it will not be charged to help you, other than engage with your child.

But, support will be charged, to assess your capability, as a parent, and, whether you have a safe, clean, adequate home environment.

But you again, will be unaware of this. https://finolamoss.wordpress.com/2014/10/14/gathering-evidence-from-social-https://finolamoss.wordpress.com/2014/10/14/gathering-evidence-from-social-care/

Regular meeting s behind your back, will be held, between the social services, education, and, agency worker provider, who  have ‘your file’.

Your family, and child, will be whatever, they, in secret, decide.

Any information, you provide to workers/professionals, about your child, that does not fit the cabal’s purpose, of abuse, and neglect, safeguarding concerns will be ignored.

Support workers, on zero hour, minimum wage contracts, will be briefed, on the questions, to ask, and, matters to look out for.

https://finolamoss.wordpress.com/2015/02/10/i-smell-a-rat/

Your family GP, will also  be part of the canal, and, despite confidentiality restrictions, both, your child’s medical records, and yours, will be shared.

Anything, that points to present or future parental physical, or mental incapacity, will be used to show, it is in your child’s ‘best interests’, to be removed to ‘independent’ living.

Any existent, or non-existent health, or mental concerns will be notified to your GP, by education, or, any agency, or social worker. https://finolamoss.wordpress.com/2014/08/24/my-complaint-and-unaccountable-services/

To possibly gain support, as a carer, or, any respite, cleaning   etc, you will have to undergo a Carer’s assessment.

This is used to probe, every aspect of your physical and mental ‘wellbeing’.

But, the LA are not under a duty, to provide support, and, have no funds to do so.

And, will only consider it, if the affect on a carer’s wellbeing, is ‘severe’, which would then make a carer, unfit, and/or a risk to their chargee. https://finolamoss.wordpress.com/2014/11/20/carers-act-2014-care-to-ensnare/

‘Concerns’, from support/education workers, are relayed to social services.

And sought expressly, by leading questioning.

And covertly, by tricks and grooming.

You will consider them all your friends, until without notice they disappear.

They will not raise their concerns with you.

https://finolamoss.wordpress.com/2015/01/31/education-report-a-red-mark-the-size-of-a-fist/

These ‘concerns’, will be placed in court statements,to prevent you representing your child in court as you are cast as abuser/neglector there is a conflict of interests between you and your child.,

And, show, it is in his ‘best interests’, to be removed from you and your contact limited.

You will only discover, their ‘concerns’, on reading your social worker’s  court statement, in support of s48 Mental Capacity Act Interim application to the Court of Protection.

Your child will be forced, if necessary, by a court order, to undergo a psychological assessment, paid for by the LA.

This will assess, any deemed emotional abuse your child is subjected to at home, and a blanket, illegal capacity test.

https://finolamoss.wordpress.com/2015/03/03/standard-capacity-assessments-stephen-hawking-would-fail-without-his-box/

This will state, that due to your child’s ‘intellectual disability’, he is, and has always been, unable to make any decisions.

It is now assumed that children subject to a SEN now EHC statement will be incapable under MCA and conferences for SEN families give presentations to that effect on Transition ie 16-18, see here

https://www.ambitiousaboutautism.org.uk/sites/default/files/Transition%20seminar%20FINAL%20(2).pdf

Your child has now been made, the perfect commodity for life, for the multibillion pound, unaccountable, independent living industry.

https://finolamoss.wordpress.com/2015/05/31/the-mental-capacity-act-in-practice-emancipated-or-insentient/

Where he is safely behind the closed doors of the state where abuse  or even death is not investigated.

Your GP, will  look for signs of neglect, weight loss, bed sores, skin conditions, abuse, and self -harm.

https://finolamoss.wordpress.com/2014/09/25/a-voice-crying-in-the-wilderness/

If you proffer other causes, this may be evidence of fabricated disorder/ Munchausen.

Your GP, will be instructed by the Court of Protection, to do a  physical examination of your child, under s49 MCA, whether necessary, or not, and, any other assessments.

And, regardless of the distress, it causes.

His letter of instruction, will state, that the LA have concerns, and, that you have denied access, to your child, weather proved, or not.

Once the Court, becomes involved, any support workers, will become overt assessors.

All care agencies, and day centres, are funded by the LA, and therefore, controlled by them.

And as, ‘independent’ away from home living, is now the LA’s, only policy, for adult social care, all feed into it.

Despite, his EU, United Nations Rights not, to have the state remove his right to make decisions,http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?id=279

Here is an OFSTED report in 2016 showing the shambles SEN is in there.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/575666/Joint_local_area_SEND_inspection_in_Surrey.pdf

You, and your child are flies in a sealed LA web.

The government’s Transforming Care document proposes early intervention for the autistic and learning disabled who evidence ‘challenging behaviour  and contains the following statistics;.

There are an estimated 1.2 million people in England, of which 286,000 are children and young people under the age of 18, with a learning disability (Emerson et al. 2012).

This means that roughly 20 people in every thousand have a learning disability (2-3% of the general population). The majority live their lives without support from specialist learning disability services – for instance, of the roughly 1 million adults with a learning disability, it is estimated that 189,000 (21%) (Emerson et al. 2012) are known to learning disability services.

There are an estimated 700,000 people with autism in England (Brugha et al. 2012) of which 125,000 are children and young people under the age of 18 (Baird et al. 2006).

This means that roughly 11 people in every thousand have autism (1.1% of the general population). It is estimated that 44%-52% of people with autism also have a learning disability (Emerson et al. 2010).

Those who display behaviour that challenges Challenging behaviours are generally understood to be exhibited by 10-15% of adults with learning disabilities known to services (approx. 22-34,000 people), whilst often peaking between the ages of 20-49 (Emerson et al. 2001).

A further 40,000 of children under the age of 18 are believed to display challenging behaviour (Emerson et al 2014).

As set out in Challenging Behaviour: A Unified Approach (Royal College of Psychiatrists, et al, 2007, p.14) challenging behaviour is behaviour

of such an intensity, frequency or duration as to threaten the quality of life and/or the physical safety of the individual or others and is likely to lead to responses that are restrictive, aversive or result in exclusion”.

 

Determined to harvest your child.spider-net-g8i1

Advertisements

The Mental Capacity Act in practice -emancipated or insentient?

feguard

untitled

8 years ago, the Mental Capacity Act was, supposedly implemented to provide a  ’ legal’ framework, to empower, and emancipate,   the incapables’ ‘decision making’.

But has it?

No. See House of Lords Select Committee report.

The Local Authority strategy, to remove all suspected ‘incapables’ to private for profit state care, increased rapidly, after 2007.

Studies show, these removals   were at first,  often illegal, without reference to the Court  of Protection. http://www.communitycare.co.uk/2012/10/30/where-social-workers-are-going-wrong-on-the-mental-capacity-act/

Whereas, now the Court rubber stamps  removal.

As analysed in previous posts, it is functionally, very difficult, to legally comply with s1 of the Act, and, empower the vulnerable.

And this has not happened, as the Act is being used to remove all decisions from the vulnerable and their parents.

From this, we can only  conclude, the real reason for the Act,  was to enforce  private profit institutional  ‘care’ for life away from family and effectively any real community.

Such care, would have huge benefits, for  the government, and LAs.

The LA, gets the old, disabled, and vulnerable off their books, eradicating the need for adult care.

Social workers, are used as enforcers, and then, replaced by care managers, who merely oversee private provision they have commissioned and would be liable for if inadequate.

LA budgets, do not then, have to be used on continuing   home support.

Private profit care, benefits the government,   as,  public money,  available, to the disabled and their families, under the Chronically Sick and Disabled Act 1970, can instead be used by venture capitalists, and businesses, to make profit, from social care,  fuelling  economic growth.

LA budget cuts, purporting to reduce the UK deficit, actually increase it, by payment of huge sums to private care providers .

The market for such care, is  ever extended, now to those which learning disabilities, and behavioural problems, to maximise the potential consumer base.

Capacity/ability to make a decision is assessed routinely, and covertly.

The Care Act 2014, implemented last month, dilutes ‘capacity’, to ’substantial difficulty’ in being involved in decisions.

As   assessments   are   routine, they are  based on age, or label, and  therefore MCA illegal, but who, or, how, could anyone complain?

This approach is highly discriminatory, and, marginalises, and stigmatises   certain groups of people, by questioning their ‘decisions’, and, removing their right to make them.

The state can then enforce any care, and medication, they want.

For those living in residential care, rather than for emancipation, the MCA  is being used, to justify tick- boxed regulation, and unchecked, perfunctory at best, standards of ‘care’, and, defend practioners.

The Supreme Court   decision Cheshire West   [2014] UKSC 19, graphically illustrated, how functionally unworkable the   MCA is, in relation to the many deprivation of liberties, that take place daily, in private care.

And caused   a bureaucratic nightmare, which will do nothing to empower the vulnerable, but simply increases the box ticking of already overburdened, understaffed, underpaid care workers.

It has been translated operationally, to a Review of the Care Provision annually of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards with a Relevant Registered Person, who is generally not a family member but similar to an IMCA trained and appointed by a charity, but paid for by the state and the Adult Services. Most Care Providers have computer software to deal with the matter as part of their ‘best interests’ check list.

As,   with deprivation of liberties, any attempt to actually apply the Act, to the myriad of individual daily decisions, in residential care, as is required by the Act, would also be functionally impossible, particularly, in our, all for profit, zero hour care factories.

Usefully, the court practice is to remove a person’s capacity to make all future decisions, despite this being illegal under the MCA.

This assessment, to add weight to it will often be by a psychologist, pursuant to section 48 MCA.

But can be anyone.

And a s48 MCA application is granted to the LA on merely showing they suspect a person incapable.

The standard assessment order will decide, if a person has the capacity to litigate, make decisions as to where he lives, the care he receives, and the contact he has with members of his family

These are not decision specific,   and, other than for LA funding, often, need not be made, so  illegal under the MCA.

As mentioned in the post, ‘Standard Capacity Assessments Stephen Hawing would fail’, the standard LA assessment, is also apparently illegal.

And, does nothing to maximise capacity, other than tick a box on ease, comfort of circumstances, and, appears not to   encourage joint decision making.

We have no figures of how many, if any, pass the capacity test.

If an assessor, were to find a person   capable, he is proving his pay master LA, who suspected incapacity, and, applied to court, wrong.

The standard Record of Assessment,   will also certify, that a person, is unlikely to regain capacity, condemning him, to never, being allowed to make a decision again.

Providing  care providers, with a blanket incapacity assessment for all future decisions, again illegal.

Worse still, capacity, appears to be being equated with sentience.

As shown in Cheshire West judgement.

Where the court of appeal, and minority of the Supreme Court, held that a person can only be deprived of his liberty, if he has the capacity to understand and object to his situation, ie be aware of it.

Even Lady Hale eluded to ‘incapacity’, being equal to unawareness, by her words

An unconscious or sleeping person may not know that he has been locked in a cell, but he has still been deprived of his liberty.

A mentally disordered person who has been kept in a cupboard under the stairs (a not uncommon occurrence in days gone by) may not appreciate that there is any alternative way to live, but he has still been deprived of his liberty’.

Care workers are encouraged to believe, these very vulnerable scared lonely people with communication issues are actually incapable of any awareness or feeling.

As a support worker, horrifyingly  remarked to me ,

‘Would Issy know what was happening, if 5 strangers removed her from home ?’

The state is now allowed by the subversion  of the MCA, to create  the perfect commodities.

And,  the perfect   victims.insentient

 

The Mental Capacity Test- The Fool of Law ?

Rule of Law is the basis of our freedom and democracy.

It is our protection from state exploitation and tyranny.

It provides our laws must be certain.

Our main and most authoritative source of law is an Act of Parliament.

Parliament must therefore ensure Acts are certain.

That means sufficiently well drafted to be implemented without the need for too much discretion and/or subjectivity on behalf of the executive and/or the judiciary.

If  not the state will be given too much unauthorised ( not sanctioned by Parliament), unpredictable power over an individual.

An Act historically commenced with a paragraph describing its ‘sprit and intendment’, known as a Preamble.

The Preamble’s function  was to explain the purpose of an Act to assist interpretation and application.

Preambles are now rare as thought historic and superfluous .

But The Mental Capacity Act commences with 5 overarching principles in the style of a Preamble but drafted as section 1.

Worse still this section is the main substance of the Act and its overriding principle the agreed by Parliament giving of autonomy to an individual so that decisions he was capable of making were not made for him but it is written in the style of a preamble.

And then the Act dangerously in breach of the rule of law gives no  further specific provisions enacting the main purpose of the Act in s1 principles.

But instead places complete reliance on a lengthy  Code of Practice.

This is poor drafting as it leaves the Act vague and therefore ripe for executive bureaucratic discretion and gives too much unfetted power over the individual.

From a general s.1 embedding autonomy and making a capacity assessment a last resort.

The Act  says no more on these crucial matters other than in the Code of Conduct.

Leaving the purpose of the Act and how it should be implemented to a Code of Conduct.

The  effect of this  is, there no law to  implement the purposes Act in s1.

Instead, s 2 and 3, move straight to define what a person has to prove, to avoid having their ‘capacity’ removed.

By anyone’s standards, a strange way to draft an Act promoting autonomy.

Section 2, is stage one of the capacity assessment.

‘Capacity’ is rather unhelpfully defined, in the Code of Conduct,

as ‘the ability to make a decision’.

Stage one of the capacity test, consists of a finding, that a person has,

an impairment of, or disturbance in, the functioning of the mind, or brain’.

And gives a non-exhaustive, expansive list of examples. mental illness, learning disabled, now 375, including intoxication by alcohol and effect of medication.

But avoids any  definitions/explanations, of these listed classes.

Or the blood sugar, intoxication levels needed to impair or disturb, or indeed, any definition of impairment, or disturbance, or the degree needed to satisfy the test.

This level of vagueness, expansiveness and inherent subjectivity, can only be deliberate..

And, one wonders how anyone, could manage, not to fail  stage one.

Is there any evidence, that anyone has ever passed it?

This means section 3, stage two will almost always be automatically moved on to.

This undefined impairment/disturbance, must be sufficient, to cause the person to be unable to make a particular decision, at the relevant time, when it is needed.

A person is unable to make a decision and therefore, ‘incapable’ if he fails any one of the following;

Firstly, if found that he,

cannot understand information given’.

‘Information given’ is ‘defined’ in the Code of Practice,

‘as information relating to the nature of the decision’.

This leaves the assessor and us to speculate, as to what this ‘information’ might be, and how it is to be imparted to the person who is already suspected of being mentally ‘incapable’.

Consider, for example, the information, that needs to be given to  the suspected ‘incapable’, to make the usual decisions, required in a standard court capacity order;

Which consists of, whether they want to represent themselves in the Court of Protection, where they want to reside, who they want to see, and, whether, they can decide all their own personal welfare decisions.

This  involves the need to impart, a potentially limitless amount of information to the person being assessed capable of making them.

And not only does the assessor need to impart all this information,

S3 (2)   also requires him, to present this information,

in the best way to maximise a person’s capacity’.

So, all this must warrant a vague, impossible, Herculean feat.

But it gets even worse, the poor assessor, is then given, the  even more difficult/impossible task of judging if, a person has  understood all this information.

How can an assessor possibly to this ?

How can he possibly  judge what another person has understood ?

Particularly, if that person has communication difficulties.

If a person says yes, I understand, what it means to act for myself in the court of protection.

Unlikely per se, even if he had already experienced it, and assuming, he had been provided with all the information, relating to the decision, whatever that might be.

Yes, I know all that is involved in looking after my personal welfare, and, have considered, all the information relating to all these decisions, another imponderable.

Will this be sufficient, for an assessor, to be satisfied, a person has indeed, understood, the infinite nuances of such information?

Remember, the assessor, is not allowed by the Act, to make judgements, solely on a person’s behaviour or presentation.

If a person, passes that part of  the test.

How can only be imagined.

The assessor must then decide, that the person is able, to retain, all this mass of information,

long enough to be able to make a decision’.

The Act, does not  stipulate for how long, nor why, this  is specifically made necessary.

As presumably, a person normally indicates his decision, as soon, as he has understood the information, in answer to the question, that requires that decision.

And presumably, the ability to understand this question, by necessity, would need the retention of this information for the required time.

But not only is the assessor charged with assessing the length of ‘memory’ required.

The assessor has to then go on to decide if a person’s   ability,

to use and weigh up the information in making the decision’, is sufficient.

Wow.

This will involve the assessor having the skills, and information, even experts, in the plethora of areas, involved in the decisions, might not possess.

Inter alia, statistics on success of litigants in person, caring for yourself, over being cared for by the state, the psychological effects of seeing certain people, or not, the advantages of a particular residence now, and, in the future.

And, how can an assessor, possibly judge what should be ‘evaluated’, in such decisions.

The assessor himself is unlikely to be able to. Who would?

And, more crucially, whether  the  person with communication difficulties, has ‘evaluated’ them properly?

On what objective criteria, will an assessor’s judgement be based, and, what is to be evaluated?

Such an evaluation, would require an objective evaluation of a sea of information, and unknown future imponderables, and expert knowledge.

But, even more crucially, such evaluation, relies on, and requires, that the person being assessed, has extremely good communication skills, to be able to impart to the assessor, how he evaluated his decision.

How could a person, suspected of mental incapacity, with normally very poor, if any, communication skills, be expected, to explain his evaluation of all this required information?

This must therefore, on analysis, be found to be a farcical, unworkable assessment.

And, grossly unfair on the assessee.

Particularly as in law he is only forced to be assessed because of his disability.

Yet, such assessments, have already removed the autonomy of over a million, with a potential for millions more, for life.

Assessments, that do not even satisfy superficial scrutiny, are removing, our citizens rights to make their own decisions.

Worse still, the Care Act 2014, now weakens the definition of ‘capacity’, to having ‘substantial difficulty’ being involved in specific decisions.

And, this ‘substantial difficulty’ test is the same as the ‘capacity test’ definition in the MCA.

So anyone can assess, and the ‘assessment’, is effectively totally subjective/unworkable.

Terrifying confirmation, that the state is determined, to remove the autonomy of anyone they want to.

Two Acts, provide and dilute, the ultimate weapon of control, and, create a  means to use anyone, as a commodity for private profit.

Has anyone ever passed such a capacity/ ‘substantial difficulty’ test?

It-Is-Not-Torture-Small

No one survives a  MCA capacity test

 

Autism Epidemic the betrayal of the ‘different’ for profit.

Einstein_Tongue

What is autism?

The truth is startling.

No one has a clue.

There is no pathology, no gene, no biomarkers and little understanding .

It is an intrinsic part of an individual’s personality.

And as such, many maintain is not an ‘impairment of mind’, under the Mental Capacity Act.

And, it was not until recently  a mental disorder under the Mental Health Act.

It is a spectrum, we are all on.

Like quantum mechanics, it does not exist, until observed and labelled.

Only 70 years ago, it was merely a Greek word, meaning, ‘absorbed in self’.

Associated with loners, high intelligence, gifts, cold mothers, and, the children of academics.

Newton, Mozart and Einstein, who at 7, constantly repeated certain phrases, all showed autistic traits.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/3326317/Albert-Einstein-found-genius-through-autism.html

On reading Plato’s description of Socrates, he could well have been autistic.

A study by University of Sterling this year shows it is associated with creativity

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/aug/22/autism-creative-thinking-study?CMP=share_btn_tw

Yet a ‘lack of imagination’ is one of its main diagnosis criteria.

Read this lady’s account of the genius of her autistic  son.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Spark-Mothers-Nurturing-Genius/dp/0812983564

Scientists have urged it should not be treated as a disability but a different way of thinking with advantages

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2056941/Autism-advantage-Valuable-traits-include-exceptional-memory-visual-skills.html

Here a mute autistic writes how wrong the experts are about him.

https://growingkidstherapy.wordpress.com/2017/01/05/diagnosis-disruption-debunking-the-myths-of-non-verbal-autism/

But today in the western world autistics are made the biggest cash cows .

anhttp://www.lse.ac.uk/newsAndMedia/news/archives/2014/06/Autism.aspxd educate,

They cost the UK more than cancer,or heart disease.

Yet a recent study shows, they are 2.5 more likely to die prematurely in comparison to the rest of the population.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/308160.php

Why, as autism is not a physical illness ?

Is it because the autistic are huge pharma cash cows, earning billions for the autism and pharma industries, yet  receive little or no proper medical treatment.

And as a lucrative commodity the  number of autistic in the UK has increased ten fold, in the last 15 years, and 50% in the last 5 years.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/9160322/Number-of-children-with-autism-soars-by-more-than-50-per-cent-in-five-years.html

In the US, study shows, it will cost one trillon billion dollars by 2025 http://consumer.healthday.com/cognitive-health-information-26/autism-news-51/u-s-autism-costs-could-reach-1-trillion-by-2025-study-701789.

Surveys increase the epidemic.

htmlhttp://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-11-13/autism-rate-nearly-doubles-on-paper-after-a-survey-is-changed

So there is an awful lot of money to be made out of autism.

It is likely, some disorders diagnosed as ‘autism’ is not but reaction/effect of vaccines- compulsory in USA, put under autism’s vague umbrella.

View story at Medium.com

Autistics are now assessed,  as intellectually disabled, based unfairly/discriminatory on adeptive skills alone, irrespective of IQ.

And then  taught, medicated, and treated, as if mentally retarded.

This  allows inappropriate ‘special needs’ non- education, drug administration.

And, worse still, autistics being assessed, at 18, as being ‘incapable’ of  the most basic decisions, as to who they have a relationship with or where they live.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 is being  illegally enforced, allowing the state to declare the autistic,  incapable of making any future or past decision.

Yet, educationally, autism, is a conditioning disability, not a learning one.

Autistics are not intellectually disabled.

Autistic children’s  IQs, have been shown, in recent research by Swansea University, to be underestimated, as IQ tests are designed for non autistic children.

https://finolamoss.wordpress.com/2015/09/10/profitable-retardation-of-the-autistic/

They merely have a different perception of reality, and therefore think, and  learn differently.

Autism, is explained and defined, as a difficulty with social imagination, communication, and interaction.

A  vague, expansive, meaningless definition.

What is social imagination ?

Autistics, once labelled, are perfunctorily and simplistically stereo typed, with little regard to the individual.

All like routine, all have sensory problems, all do not look you in the eyes, all hate transitions, all do not understand others emotions, and, the most damning  judgement, all are insentient, under the Mental Capacity Act.

And all this is wrong and discriminatory.

The different, are penalised, because they do not behave socially, learn or communicate as they should.

This, and, ever more blunted psychological diagnostic tools, make it, far too easy to label, a person, who merely, has an unknown, educational, communicational, and social ‘difference’ from the norm.

The diagnosis based on adeptive skills and misdiagnosed intellectual disability.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/health/research/new-autism-definition-would-exclude-many-study-suggests.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&hp

With such a cash cow, is it any wonder, more autistics are sought.

By awareness campaigns, in their best interests.

The latest is, to harvest autistic girls, on the basis, too few are being diagnosed.

Yet, the proportion of autistic girls, accords with the biology that the X chromosome masks the disorder in a female.

Who is merely a carrier of the ‘autism’ gene.

And a female will need both her X chromosomes to be affected, so an affected X from each parent, to manifest autism.

So is 50% less likely than a male to be autistic.

Mandatory  Universal Autism Screening has been called for.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/309783.php

The ‘at risk’ who might not be autistic are sought, and research into genetic causes and biological processes paid for presumably to market drugs and vaccines but specific genes cannot be found.http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/308185.php

It can now supposedly be detected in babies and now before symptoms appear.

http://www.disabledgo.com/blog/2017/02/autism-detectable-in-brain-long-before-symptoms-appear/#.WKYEtIXXJjo

An autism label has already proved devastating for over a million in the UK.

Who with America, form an epidemic in the western world, but not   in the East, and, autism, is virtually non-existent in the third world.

The, ‘in the know’, late developing eccentrics, with private means, can avoid detection, and labelling, research proper education, and, like the characters in the New York specialist school in the book, ‘Bring in the idiots’, become high flyers, in literature, and technology.

But not, the ever increasing majority, destined, to be cash cows, for the burgeoning autism industry.

Which spans charities, pharmaceutical, educational special needs, NHS, social care, and independent living.

74% are on anti-psychotic drugs, and, imprisoned for life in NHS ‘treatment’ centres, or ‘independent’ away from family living.

http://www.disabledgo.com/blog/2015/09/fears-that-antipsychotic-drugs-being-used-as-chemical-cosh-in-disability-care/?utm_source=DisabledGo+Blog&utm_medium=facebook

Autism is a social conduct development ‘disorder’ at most, and was not within the Mental Health Act until  recently.

It is not a mental illness.

But recent campaigns that autistics’ mental health was being neglected, enabled, autistic conduct to be perfunctorily diagnosed as separate mental disorders.

Even normal reactions of autistics to crowds, noise, muti stimuli has  now been labelled a separate disorder of Pathological Demand Disorder and Petitions supported by NAS have had it recognised in Scottish Parliament.

How can a mere facet of autism be recognised as a separate disorder, when this should have been appreciated as part of ASD and educated, treated cared for already ?

It serves to surreptitiously widens the net of cash cows by more diagnosis and will not improve care.

ASD has only be placed in the MHA fairly recently and is not a mental but a conduct disorder.

Continually government money is spent to show autistic are mental, the latest Cambridge and Coventry University report on their greater risk of suicide and depression January 2017.

https://www.learningdisabilitytoday.co.uk/study-launched-to-understand-why-autistic-people-may-be-more-at-risk-of-mental-health-issues.aspx

This is the worst form of discrimination and misrepresentation of the autistic and allows autism to be a mental disorder and other mental disorders to be added.

Each requiring profitable medication- OCD, psychosis, anxiety, depression, self-harm, OD, ADHD, and increasing the amount that can be claimed for their care.

https://www.autistica.org.uk/research/mental-health/

So they really are a useful, lucrative feed to the mental health industry and pharma.

How did this all happen? Is no one fighting for the autistic ?

In 2007, the National Autistic Society was the 8th largest charity in the UK, rich with government funding, and, 177,000 per annum residential school placements.

But,  was, strangely, precluded by its trust deed, from researching into the causes of autism.

Its campaign for autism rights, embodied in the Autism Act 2009.

Resulted in worthless, Local Authority Guidelines.

Which need expensive, complex, costs risky judicial reviews, by individuals to enforce.

To date I know of none.

So Local Authorities can ignore the Act.

As shown LA’s adult services policy of non-provision of specialist care.

But, the LA, commission, and the NHS pay, independent living providers, like the National Autistic Society, Autism Care UK, on the ‘severity’ of the individual’s disability.

Using the money available for disabled, and  family support, under the Chronically Sick and Disabled Act1970.

But now neither are given an option except private enforced secret care.

The autism industry, and venture capital, profit from creating ‘difference’.

The autistics have lost their lives, and, we have lost our visionaries, and eccentrics.

See here how a definition of autism allows  the state and care workers to decide all your decisions for life even when you are obviously capable and high functioning.

See fate of this 20 year old diagnosed  as autistic at 18, when Dimensions who own independent living support and the LA  got involved in her life. And an LA behavioural psychiatrist who decided she was MCA incapable of deciding, who she had relationships with and where she lived- terrifying stuff, happens nowhere else in the world.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCOP/2016/4.html

Read here latest book dispelling the myths about Autism by Steve Sliberman, The Legacy of Autism and the Future of Neurodiversity

http://www.npr.org/2016/09/09/493148713/neurotribes-examines-the-history-and-myths-of-the-autism-spectrum

Despite or because of being made cash cows a study revealed they die prematurely

Dr Hirvikoski says that she was “shocked and horrified” at the results.

Her team found that the mean age of death of somebody with autism was 54 – compared with 70 for the general population. For people with autism and a learning disability, life expectancy was a mere 40 years.

 

 

 

 

autism6

The Mental Capacity Act, can make anyone, a prisoner of the state.

cropped-big-brother-is-watching-1984_jpgThe Mental Capacity Act 2005 not only qualifies, as the most socially draconian Act in modern history but also created its own court.

Why?

To purportedly protect the rights of the vulnerable.

A surprisingly laudable reason for a government.

Particularly, with no media pressure,  scandals, petitions, or campaigns that  warranted any legislation, let alone such a monster of oppression.

Whilst now 8 years  on,  there is huge pressure and an urgent need to protect our vulnerable from a plethora of  scandals, Winterbourne, statistics that 3 learning disabled, die needlessly per day and concerned relatives, if not  excluded, resorting to spy cameras.

If this Act were about protection it is a catastrophic failure.

So, why was the cost and time of this Act, thought so necessary, it was pursued for years  and implemented subject to review, despite two years of House of Lords objections?

And why did its need ignore the fact that  the inherent High Court jurisdiction, Enduring  Powers of Attorneys, the doctrine of necessity and The Office of Public Guardian had already  adequately protected the vulnerable,  for centuries.

And still do except in the UK.

Far from protecting the vulnerable, the Act has served to encage them, and make them, far more vulnerable.

So what was, the purported reason for  the Act ?

Amazingly,  little.

A government concern, that due to the ‘unstructured’ nature of  protection, decisions vulnerable people could make for themselves were being  made by others.

And, if   a person became  incapable of making a decision  others should be prevented from making this decisions without the vulnerable’s, considerable involvement.

The fact that today,  such an implausible respect for an individual’s autonomy has through the subversive implementation of the Act resulted in the total removal of a vulnerable person’s autonomy, sadly, reveals the government’s real agenda.

The very concerns, the government sought to remedy, are now given flesh, by the Act.

It  is being used, not only, not to involve vulnerable in decisions  concerning them, but it also, allows LAs/ care providers, to make all the vulnerable’s decisions for life.

Incapacity, is needed for the jurisdiction of the Court of Protection.

It is the gateway, to an individual’s  every future decision being made by the state.

Allowing a vulnerable adult, unlucky enough to need  ‘support’to be made a captive consumer of any state care, without reprieve, escape or complaint.

A person’s worst nightmare.

Every decision made for you, by strangers, whose overriding interest is profit .

And, the MCA has been drafted, to allow potentially, anyone’s, decisions to be made for them.

As it provides any state agent, care/support worker, social worker, nurse, GP, psychologist, counsellor, alzeimer friend, even neighbour, can assess whether an individual is ‘capable’.

If they appear to them to be mentally impaired as a result of a non exhaustive, all embracing list- learning disability, mental health problem, brain injury, dementia, alcohol or drug misuse, effects of treatment/medication or in fact any other illness or disability.

Not only is the list of ‘assessors’ effectively anyone, the reasons for  ‘incapacity’ is limitless.

Already, psychiatry/mental health is farcically extensive the US having created  375 mental disorders, diagnosed on a symptoms based subjective basis.

How vague, and subjective are these extensive impairments ‘learning disability’, ‘any other illness’ and the ‘side effects of medication’ ?

The Act  has been drafted to allow anyone, who comes into contact with a member of the public,  to assess them as incapable of making decisions.

Beyond terrifying, and amazing is the  power, it gives the state and their informers.

The ability to remove anyone’s autonomy by stealth and deem them a non person.

See latest rulings from Mr Justice Charles on Deprivation of Liberty Orders

http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/news/press-releases/ruling-highlights-rights-of-vulnerable-people-in-deprivation-of-liberty-hearings/

Worse than  Orwell’s ‘1984’ monitors.

The state ‘us’ is given the right to assess the ‘them’; without the ‘them’ even knowing,  and the ‘them’ are not even given the right to challenge the assessment.

And the courts, then remove all a person’s decision making rights, by illegal, blanket, general assessments, in a secret court.

The Act is not  protecting our ‘vulnerables’ rights but  removing them.

For NHS/LA private profit.

And, as the state decides, who is ‘vulnerable’  and it could be you.

 

Acting out? – Dont worry we have medications for that!

This is a post from  Justice for Thomas Rawnsley’s blog.

With photos taken of Thomas,months before he died, in an Adult Treatment Unit in Sheffield, where he was taken after a carer, had said’ How many fingers can I break this time’, but was unable to as Thomas was double jointed.

After this, Thomas was found difficult to care for, so was sent to this ATU, where he was the only patient, and keeping it open, by his abuse, being used, to claim £4,500 per week for the ‘care’, evidenced by the beyond shocking photos taken.

4

Thomas in ATU on medication .

This is the unashamed use of the LA, and our government, of the most vulnerable for investment, and huge profit, using public funds, and breaching their statutory duty to care for them, but to claim the maximum money available under law for their ‘care’, on the basis of their ‘disbility’.

This is also 4 years after Winterbourne View was officially investigated.article-1392892-0C588EA900000578-684_468x286

Since then there has been more abuse, and death, for profit, of our most vulnerable.

The only move, via Norman Lamb, and LB Bill, is to move them out of NHS, MHA ‘care’/’treatment’, to LA, MCA ‘care’, for life in independent for profit living, with no reviews.

Thomas, was placed in such independent living accommodation, where he was abused, and from where, he was sent to an ATU, where he died.

A Surprisingly Good Visit from NHS Mental Health

IMG_0391This day proved a welcome relief, in a life of no reliefs.

The psychiatrist, a tall, attractive Scottish lady, was extraordinarily human, unassuming, and affable.

And the psychologist, unlike some I’ve taught, and the one in 2007, did not observe, or judge me, and had personality.

And, usefully, busied herself with Isabel’s Progress File from Robert Ogden School.

So, all went well in the kitchen.

So well,  two hours flew by without coffee.

I cannot relay, how good it feels, to be respected, and deferred to.

It had never happened before.

I almost felt like a person, rather than the object of negative analysis.

Issy had been up most of the night and was still sleep.

The long awaited period was evident, when we eventually wondered into her bedroom, andwere told to get out.

As usual, no one appeared to know anything,  so were filled in on the chronology to date.

The psychiatrist asked about food preferences, medical allergies and medication.

Worryingly,the type of questions asked before an inpatient stay.

I hoped,they were standard, but then wondered why, the information was not obtained from Isabel’s medical records.

But such are the mysteries of information sharing protocols.

Annoying for us, and professionals

The only major worrying question, on reflection was,

‘Did Issy eat with us?’

My proven justifiable  paranoia, bounced me back, to our first education package, and a comment, I had made to a Reed agency education carer, who’d latterly became a spy.

It was innocuous enough, but, it appears anything, can be made to fit the agenda.

On describing Issy’s trauma, after her 48 bruise NAS restraint, I remarked, ’Issy  would no longer sit and eat with us at the table in our apartment lounge in Ireland’.

This appeared to have been seized upon, by the worker’s grilling ‘education’ boss, and  relayed to our social worker and spun in  our last core assessment to;

It has been observed by workers that the family tend to sit around the table together to eat while Isobel eats alone in the lounge’

I complained about this in April 2014, pointing out, it could not ‘have been observed by workers that the family tend to sit around the table to eat’ as;

a) No worker has ever seen us eat as a family.

And,

b) We do not ‘eat as a family’, except at Christmas and Easter; the drop leaf table in the kitchen being rarely used.

We eat from plates on our knees, in the lounge, watching TV, as we are soap fans,

And

c) Issy has never eaten in the lounge.  She  eats in her bedroom.

It had been made in a sectionheaded Comment on the young person’s needs in relation to family and social relationships, thus, the workers impossible observation, of our deliberate isolating of Issy, appearing evidence of  emotional abuse.

This being one of the very, if only specific questions asked of Issy, and coupled with ‘ I wouldn’t like crumbs in the sitting room’ was both infuriating and worrying.

As it appeared information we had tried to officially correct and was incorrect second hand hearsay, as no worker had ever seen us eat let alone at a table, had been relayed to a NHS psychiatric team charged with assessing  any  emotional abuse of Issy at home.

Excepting for this rather large ponderable,- where they working from a crib sheet ? all went well.

Angel Eyes appeared on Monday and Thursday.

And as usual was a star, and worked her socks off.

Issy has been up, and in a good mood, despite the period.

But wants to be permanently tickled.

But then, who doesn’t?