Action urged on liberty of disabled

Lady Hale, deputy president of the Supreme Court, said disability did not entitle the state to deny disabled people their human rights
19 March 2014

Campaigners want Government action after a "landmark" Supreme Court ruling on the rights of disabled people living in care facilities.

Charities said Supreme Court justices had provided clarity about when disabled people were being deprived of liberty under the terms of mental health legislation.

They called on ministers to issue guidance to care providers and local authorities in the wake of the ruling.

"We now have an acid test from the highest court in the land clarifying what counts as a deprivation of liberty," said Mark Lever, chief executive of the National Autistic Society, who described the ruling as a "landmark".

"We call on the Government to urgently issue clear guidance to care providers and local authorities so that they can implement this judgment."

Supreme Court justices today ruled that three disabled people who lived in care facilities had been "deprived of their liberty".

Lady Hale, deputy president of the Supreme Court, said in the ruling that disabled people had the same human right to "physical liberty" as anyone.

And she said the fact that disabled people might be deprived of liberty in care facilities where living arrangements were comfortable made no difference.

She said a "gilded cage" was "still a cage".

Seven Supreme Court justices had analysed the cases of two sisters with learning difficulties and a man with cerebral palsy at a hearing in London.

The did not identify any of the people involved, b ut they said the local authority with responsibility for the sisters was Surrey County Council and the local authority with responsibility for the man was Cheshire West and Chester Council.

Justices said they had considered criteria for judging whether living arrangements for mentally incapacitated people amounted to a "deprivation of liberty".

They said such deprivation had to be authorised under the terms of the 2005 Mental Capacity Act and living arrangements subjected to regular independent checks.

Campaigners said the ruling followed a recent report by a House of Lords Select Committee, which concluded that the Mental Capacity Act was failing.

Create a FREE account to continue reading

eros

Registration is a free and easy way to support our journalism.

Join our community where you can: comment on stories; sign up to newsletters; enter competitions and access content on our app.

Your email address

Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number

You must be at least 18 years old to create an account

* Required fields

Already have an account? SIGN IN

By clicking Create Account you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use , Cookie policy and Privacy policy .

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged in