Monday, 16 July 2018

Increased role for care homes in DoLS replacement model risks conflicts of interest, warn experts

How can Care Home Managers take over the Best Interest Assessors Job?
Surely a conflict of interest via the Work the Care Manager of the home taking on the process.
For one thing there could be utter conflict with Family Members and the Person that has taken on the Role of Relevant Persons Advocate, it is usually a Family Member that takes on the Role, or when there is nobody to take on this Role it usually is an Independent paid Advocate the takes on the role.
The Care Manager definitely might have conflicting opinions with regards to all Family Members, especially if there as been a Complaint put in about the Home via the Quality Care Commission..
The Dols Department is run by the LA, and mostly all best interest Assessors are qualified Social Workers that sees the Relevant Person and Their Family Members, and they decide with a Psychiatrist report to place the Person on a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard.
Care Home home Managers are not adequately qualified to take on the Role of BIA, and may be biased to recommend if a Family Member should take on the Relevant Persons Advocate, especially if they have put a complaint into the care home about poor practice..
Obviously the Care Home Manager would put a report into the LA, DOLS team, and the Care Home  Manager may be totally biased about having Family Members as the RPA, because that Persons is allowed to see all Care Home medical and care homes notes.
Care Home Managers could have the right to decide if Family Members are allowed into the home to see their Family Member.
The RPA, has the authority to take anything they do not agree with straight to the Court of Protection..
In my case the Care Home Manager didn't even let me know that they had put a DOLS Application to the LA.


Over the past two years i have had the unfortunate experience of dealing with the dreaded Local Authority once more regarding Deprivation of Liberty.
My Family member was placed into a local care home, the care was excellent, so Thank you to the Care Team, you know who you are.
My Family Member got out of the care home and nearly got run over by a car.
The next thing came as a complete and utter shock.
A Lady from the Local Authority DOLS team contacted me, and stated that she was a BEST INTEREST ASSESSOR and would be going into the home to Assess Family Member because he was very very confused and had lost his mental capacity.
The Care Home had not told me that they had put an Application in for a Deprivation of Liberty Order on my Family Member.
That did not go down very well with me, because the Care Home Manager had a mandatory obligation to inform me as Lasting Power of Attorney that they had put the Application in.
regarding that issue i used the complaints procedure.
Anyway Sharon the BIA Best Interest Assessor spoke to me for about 15 minutes on the telephone,and stated to me that she thought it was not in my Family Members best interest for myself to become his Relevant Persons advocate, and that she would be advising the Local Authority to bring a paid advocate in.
The reason given by Sharon was that because i had serious long term medical problems and was working part time as a nurse at the time she felt that i did not have the full understanding to do things in my Family Members best interest because of being very close to them, and it would be to much of an emotional turmoil for me.
I told Sharon straight that how could she assume,her decision without ever meeting me, and speaking to me for 15 minutes on the phone.
I spoke to the BIA several times during that week, and was very upset that somebody was going to look after my Family Members affairs. without me having any input.
I strongly stated that i would not put up with her decision, and would appeal.
The BIA THEN STATED THAT if i did not go along with her wishes, she had the power to stop me from going into the care home or hospital to see my OWN HUSBAND.
I was of course aware of this, because of the Adult Social Care cases we were dealing with at PAIN
regarding DOLS, and some of our Services users had been prevented from seeing there loved ones.
At the end of the day i used the LA complaints procedure and demanded to be made relevant persons advocate.
In the end they made the decision to make me the RPA, but with the clause that an IMCA would come in and assist with my duty as RPA, under the Role of  39D  Deprivation of liberty safeguarding.
I had to contact them, totally not acceptable, she stated that she was going to see my Husband.
I told her that she was not going to see him without me being there.
The following week i had a call to my mobile while i was at a Friends house.
The call was at pm, on the line was a rather nasty Psychiatrist saying that he was going into the hospital to make an assessment on my husband at pm, he said i had no right to be there.
I told him under no terms that he would assess my husband without me being there, and i could not get to the hospital at that time as i dont drive,and it was to short notice.
I was very very UPFRONT WITH HIM AND VERY ASSERTIVE.Psychiatrist would state to the LA that i was not cooperating with him in my husbands best inters
In the end he backed down, and said that he would not be seeing my husband.
I rang the DOLS team the very next day to cover myself as RPA, because of the fear that the Psychiatrist would say that i was not cooperating in my husbands best interest.
To my surprise the DOLS team also agreed with me, that he had given to short a notice for me getting there, and i had a right to be there as NEXT OF KIN, LASTING POWER OF ATTORNEY and RPA
I could at least now represent my husband in the Court of Protection if there was any conflict of interest, with full legal aid.
THE 39D IMCA, i got one more phone call from her , asking if i needed any legal representation with reference the Court of Protection, i very politely said no, because we have the best Solicitors at PAIN, that could deal with the legal representation need be, but i had the ability to act as LIP.
I will blog about more related DOLS issues in a future blog very soon.

No comments:

Post a Comment





Do not ever agree to sign a section 20 Order out of duress by a Social Worker.

Not only will you be agreeing to Put your Child into voluntary Care, but you will not be entitled to Public Funded Legal Aid at this time.

The Social Worker more than often will say, if you do not agree to sign a section 20 Order, will will go for an Emergency Protection Order.

If they mention an Emergency Protection Order, you will need to act very quickly, and get a Children's Panel Solicitor straight away.

Solicitors that represent PAIN Service Users have been very successful in the past in preventing the granting of an Emergency Protection Order.

Social Workers will not tell you that you can try and discharge the EPO, within 72 hours.

The Local Authority can sit on this order for quite a few weeks,AND AS I HAVE ALREADY STATED YOU WILL NOT BE ENTITLED TO PUBLIC FUNDED LEGAL AID AT THIS TIME.

If you receive a Pre Proceedings letter through the post, you must take this letter straight to a specialized Children's Panel Solicitor.

The letter will state that they are considering going for Care Proceedings, and there will be a Pre Proceedings Meeting.

At any Pre Proceedings Meeting they do not always instigate Care Proceedings.

There is sometimes an Agreement contract drawn up, for you as Parents to follow the stipulations written to in the Contract.

If you breach the Agreement, then there is a high expectation that the LA will in most cases instigate Care Proceedings.

When the LA instigate Care Proceedings, and if they go for an Emergency Protection Order, this is when Non Means Tested Public Funded Legal Aid is granted.

With the Governments CHANGE OF DIRECTION FOSTER TILL YOU ADOPT COMING INTO FORCE THREE YEARS AGO, which means Foster Carers are brought in at the early stages of Care Proceedings , or Babies are allocated to Foster Carers before they are even born, this means in a lot of Cases, a Baby will be taken from His or Her Birth Parents within minutes or a few hours after birth, via an Emergency Protection Order.


This will also be breaching the Kincare Clause by placing a Child with an immediate Family Member such as Grandparents, Aunties, Uncles, before foster care is explored.

Local Authority's have a mandatory obligation to consider using the Kincare Clause, before a Child is placed into Care, and placed with Foster Carers.


My online Beauty Store

My online Beauty Store

Michael D Innis Shaken Baby Syndrome

I am a pathologist and a hematologist. My qualifications are MBBS (Bachelor of Medicine) University of Madras 1942; DTM&H (Diploma of Tropical Medicine) University of Liverpool; FRCPA (Fellow of the Royal College of Pathologists) 1960 (Australia); FRCPath (Fellow of the Royal College of Pathologists) 1972 (United Kingdom). I have substantial experience in hematology and have had experience in interpreting laboratory results for over 30 years. I have been a part time lecturer in Medicine at the University of Queensland and have instructed candidates appearing for Fellowship of the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia.

[2015 Oct] Shaken Baby Syndrome or Death by Vaccine? Doctor Speaks Out…by Chri...

[2010 March Letter] MMR Toxicity Explained by Michael D Innis

[pdf] Vaccines, Apparent Life-Threatening Events, Barlow's Disease,...

[pdf] Vitamin K deficiency disease by Michael Innis MBBS

[2008] Rapid Responses to Does cot death still exist?

[March 2008 SBS letter] Child Health Safety - BMJ Stifles Debate

[BMJ Aug 2002] History repeats itself (shaken baby syndrome)

[BMJ 22 March 2002] Misdiagnosis of “Shaken Baby Syndrome” by Michael D Innis

Shaken Baby Syndrome: Pitfalls in Diagnosis and Demographics By F. ...

Innis, SM. The role of dietary n-6 and n-3 fatty acids in the developing brain. Devel Neuroscience, 2000; 22(5-6):4740480.

My paper on “Coagulopathy mistaken for Shaken Baby Syndrome” was rejected – it recorded the case of a child given six vaccines on the same day and who was ill with fever, irritability and diarrhoea the next day and was dead three weeks later. Death was certified to be due to the Shaken Baby Syndrome on the evidence of Pathologists, Paediatricians and Radiologists when all the haematological and biochemical evidence clearly indicated death was due to a coagulopathy following hepatic insufficiency and malnutrition. [BMJ Aug 2002] History repeats itself (shaken baby syndrome)

[2010 March Letter] MMR Toxicity Explained by Michael D Innis The truth is it is harming the children because as Wakefield and his colleagues have shown, some ingredient in the vaccine causes methymalonic acidaemia followed by cobalamine deficiency and consequently neurological lesions in genetically susceptible children. The government is blind to this and one way out of this dilemma it seems is for doctors to forgo the five pieces of silver and refuse to vaccinate children on the grounds that the oath they have sworn, "first do no harm" forbids such an action.

In April 2004, Michael D. Innis, the renowned Australian pathologist-hematologist and an expert on SBS, wrote in a communication to the British Medical Journal (BMJ): ". in spite of being repeatedlychallenged to document a single authenticated case of shaken baby syndrome or shaking/impact Injury, no one has been able to do so. All they are required to do to convince judges, juries, and those of us who regard the condition as a spurious diagnosis, is present a case which:
1. was not vaccinated within 21 days of the onset of symptoms;
2. was shown to have a normal coagulation/hemostatic system;
3. had no evidence of malnutrition, and was not artificial fed or premature, since these factors predispose to fractures .
If the numerous pediatricians, ophthalmologists, radiologists and pathologists, who have given evidence in courts in the U.K., U.S. and Australia, are unable to document a single properly investigated case,there is good reason to abandon the diagnosis." Shaken Baby Syndrome And Multiple Vaccinations: An Investigation By Red Flags Columnist, F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP

They will have successfully demolished my explanation if they can document a single case of Shaken Baby Syndrome or “inflicted shaking/impact injury” (as they prefer to call it), which occurred outside the 21-day period and in which a disorder of haemostasis, nutrition, or liver disease was convincingly excluded.
I repeat, the diagnosis of Shaken Baby Syndrome or inflicted shaking/impact injury is a proven figment of the imagination of some in the medical profession and should be relegated to the scrap heap of history before it causes any more shame to the profession and disaster to innocent families. Source

To prevent death following vaccination Alan Clemetson's opinion is; "There are very rare instances of severe reactions or even death following the usual infant inoculations. Although such events are rare, we need to do all we can to prevent them.
Animal observations have shown that the blood histamine concentration is increased following the injection of vaccines or toxoids and this is most likely responsible for the problems.
Vitamin C supplementation is now known to reduce the blood histamine levels; it also reduces the mortality rates following inoculations, both in animals and in man.
It is suggested that inoculations should not be given to severely debilitated infants and that supplementary vitamin C should be given in orange juice, before inoculation, to any infant with coryza, and also to any infant or adult who is to receive an unduly large number of inoculations at one time.
Moreover, vitamin C should be given by injection whenever convulsions or other untoward events occur within a day or two after vaccination or inoculation."[1] Why not try Clemetson's suggestions - out of curiosity? ----Michael D Innis, [2008] Rapid Responses to Does cot death still exist?



Inspirational women of the year: Alison's son was snatched away after she was wrongly branded a child she fights for justice for other mothers
By Laura Topham for The Mail on Sunday
UPDATED: 08:29, 16 April 2009

View comments
The months Alison Stevens spent apart from her son still haunt her.
Twenty four years on, she cannot forget the pain she felt when social services took away her three-year-old without warning - or just cause.
Doctors should have diagnosed brittle bone disease when Alison took Scott to A&E with a broken leg. Instead, they decided he was being abused by his parents and put him in care immediately.
It took 12 long, tormented weeks for Alison and her husband, Andy, an electrician, to clear their names and win their son's return. The joy and relief they felt at having their family reunited was immeasurable. Alison was left so affected by the experience that she was determined to help other people fight similar injustices.
alison stevens
Wrongly accused: Alison Stevens
Since then, she has helped thousands of parents as the head of the national organisation Parents Against Injustice (PAIN).
'I will always remember the hurt and confusion I felt back then,' says Alison. 'It was horrendous finding Scott's hospital bed empty, then being told by nurses they thought we were to blame for his injuries. For months we had to visit him in a foster home when we desperately wanted to have him home.
'I am compelled to help other people because I understand what they are going through and how badly the system can work. This can happen to anyone and, when it does, you feel powerless.
'The toll it takes on you is indescribable - parents call me on the brink of suicide. But through PAIN I am able to help them get their children back.' While the agony still feels fresh to Alison, it was back in 1985 that her son Scott was put in care. He had been having a bath with his brother Lee, then five, when he tried to get out and slipped awkwardly, hurting his leg.
'Leaving him was like having my heart ripped out'
When Alison and Andy took Scott to hospital, doctors insisted he stay in for observation.
'Returning to the hospital that evening to visit Scott, I never suspected anything was amiss,' says Alison.
'But when we reached his bed it was empty.
'A nurse took us into a room and explained that social services had taken him away because his fracture wasn't consistent with an accident. The doctor said that we must have twisted his leg. I was distraught.'
Alison and Andy returned home, scared and confused, not knowing where Scott was and having no idea how they could get him back.
Through Yellow Pages, they discovered PAIN, a national organisation offering advice to parents wrongly accused of child abuse.
'I called them and cried down the phone,' she says.
'They were very comforting, and put me in touch with a solicitor, who specialised in child protection cases, and a doctor for a second opinion.'
The doctor asked whether Scott was small for his size and if his eyes had a blue tinge - both of which were accurate - then explained his symptoms sounded like brittle bone disease. Social services continued to refuse to let the couple know how the case was proceeding.
Then, two days later, police arrested Andy for grievous bodily harm. He was released 12 hours later due to lack of evidence. Yet it was two weeks before the family was finally told where Scott was and allowed to visit him.
An interim order granted them two hours' access, three times each week. 'His foster home was with a one parent family in a scruffy council house. It was a really rough, messy environment,' says Alison.
'When we said goodbye, Scott started screaming. He was asking why we'd sent him away and telling us he hadn't been naughty.
'Leaving him was like having my heart ripped out - I just wanted to take him home.' Alison was put in touch with a brittle bone specialist by PAIN as well as another family whose sons had been taken away in similar circumstances.
Then, three months after Scott had been removed, their solicitor called and said social services had admitted it could have been accidental. The following day, Scott was returned to his parents. 'It was wonderful having Scott back, but he was a changed child,' says Alison.
'In the past month, I've had three families reunited. That's the best news you can ever hear.'
'He was constantly angry, used terrible language and wanted everything straightaway.
'He had clearly grown used to having no discipline, and it took three years before he returned to the little boy we had known. And he still thought he'd been naughty, which was heart-breaking.'
But it wasn't only Scott who was left affected - Alison developed the inflammatory disorder Crohn's disease six weeks after Scott was taken, which she puts down to the stress she suffered as a result of losing her little boy. 'The worry was so bad it left me with health problems,' says Alison.
'Since then, I've had depression, a hiatus hernia and inflammatory bowel disease.'
The family waited a year for an appointment with the brittle bone specialist, who swiftly diagnosed the disease.
Yet Alison's experience left her wanting to help other parents, so she set up a support group in Leicester and started working with PAIN, looking after the Midlands and Yorkshire.
In 2002, the Department of Health - which had paid for three full-time paid workers - stopped funding PAIN and the organisation was forced to close.
But Alison was determined to reopen it and took over running it on a voluntary basis, in addition to her full-time work as a hospital nurse. She is now helped by two other people. Alison's achievements have been remarkable.
It was PAIN that pushed for the Parents Allowed in Case Conference Bill in the Nineties. This month, her three-year campaign with John Hemming MP to open up family courts will pay off, as journalists and charity representatives such as herself are finally allowed to attend case conferences, enabling greater public scrutiny of procedures.
She is trying to change the situation for enhanced CRB (Criminal Records Bureau) checks because any allegation remains on a person's file, even if social services take no action - 17,000 people are affected by this. But while Alison is proud of these campaigns, it is her day-to-day work with parents - 'Just being there to listen' - that remains most important to her.
'Just looking at my little granddaughter spurs me on.'
'When someone is in that situation, they want to talk to someone who can empathise,' she says.
'Last week, one woman who called was incredibly upset and, after speaking to me, said she had been thinking of suicide.
'In the past month, I've had three families reunited. That's the best news you can ever hear.'
Alison takes ten phone calls a day and responds to countless emails and messages asking for advice and guidance.
She regularly attends case conferences and court with parents. Fitting in this huge workload around full-time nursing is difficult.
Even on holiday in Egypt two months ago, Alison found an internet cafe and dealt with inquiries - though she still had 300 emails when she returned home. She feels indebted to the group.
'Without it, I might not have won back my son,' she says.
'Today, Scott is 27 and has his own baby daughter, Holly. Just looking at my little granddaughter spurs me on.'

Read more: