One of the most difficult topics I discuss with people contacting our helpline are situations where a loved one is in a care home and the attorney or attorneys have instructed the care home to deny visits to certain friends and/or family. At a Court of Protection training day I attended some time ago I raised the issue, taking advantage of the range of expertise and experience in a room full of solicitors specialising in this area. Their view was that, when this happens, the person being denied access should report the attorney/s to the Office of the Public Guardian which undertakes all the paperwork for the Court of Protection. Their view was that denying contact for no reason other than ‘We don’t want you to visit’ flies in the face of the principle of Best Interests (Mental Capacity Act 2005) and the Human Rights Act Article 8 – the Right to a Private and Family Life. Their opinion was that the Court should take an interest in these serious matters. My experience is they don’t.
I recently spoke at length with a woman whose mother had been with her partner for 23 years – as soon as he went into a care home his biological children, as his attorneys, instructed the care home to deny her mother any visits. Luckily, after many difficult and highly emotional conversations (and perhaps knowing the OPG had been contacted to investigate), the attorneys were convinced to back track but all visits were to be short and supervised by one of the attorneys or care home staff, based on their availability. On one visit, her mother was told she could only have two minutes with her partner and was not allowed to touch him, speak to him or kiss him. Of course if there had been ANY safeguarding concerns in the past (on record) then one could appreciate concerns being raised but I am fairly sure that the people I talk to are truthfully informing me that no such safeguarding risks exist – it is simply a case of power play and the problems that arise sometimes with blended families.
We are often asked to campaign on or try to influence change in various areas of dementia care but unfortunately we do not have the resources (nor the status) to effectively bring about change. However there is no doubt that with the increase in blended families this problem will be on the increase. Very sensibly the caller I mention suggested that people should use the section of their Health and Welfare Lasting Power of Attorney which offers the chance to stipulate ‘Preferences and Instructions’ to express their wish that they should always have access to certain people in their lives unless that person or persons had abused them in some way. It is the case that the Code of Practice which accompanies the MCA 2005 mentions the fact that attorneys can make decisions around who sees the donor once they have lost capacity to make those decisions for themselves which is why this would be one way to mitigate the chance that historical family dynamics feed negatively into the last months/years of the donor’s life. But usually it would not occur to the donor that such a situation would arise, of course. And this is leading to people living in care homes without being able to see friends and/or family that they had been in contact with previously, without good reason. If you have had a similar experience please contact me so that I can consider how we MIGHT be able to raise this matter in a constructive fashion in the right forum: admin@pathwaysthroughdementia.org
