Clause 1 - The Principles
Mental Capacity Bill
2:30 pm
Mr David Lammy (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs; Tottenham, Labour)
I think that I was coming to the end of my remarks and that I had begun to talk about amendment No. 8.
Basically, one must consider the alternatives. First, it may not be necessary to intervene at all in a less restrictive way. If one needs to intervene, there may be an option that is less restrictive of the person's freedom of action and his rights. The amendment says that we should not consider the person's rights when deciding what is the least restrictive action, but only his freedom of action.
As I said this morning, one of the key aims of the Bill is to empower those who lack capacity and protect their rights. Just because someone lacks the capacity to carry out certain actions or to make certain decisions, it does not mean that he forfeits his rights. The rights of the person lacking capacity must be considered when deciding how to help him in the least restrictive way; indeed, we have had some discussion about that.
I will give an example. A young man with learning disabilities or learning difficulties has problems controlling the temperature of the water in his shower. He is unable to understand that moving the dial changes the water temperature. His mother does not want to interfere with his privacy by helping him in the shower, so she installs a new one with buttons that give out water at a set temperature. In a sense, that shows the interplay of rights, the less restrictive manner and the freedom of action, as I think is indicated in the amendment.