Question
Applications seeking authorisation to deprive liberty should be: A. Via the urgent option rather than the standard option B. Reasonably anticipated in advance C. Sought when a new client's service begins, just in case they lack capacity D. Dealt with as late as possible in case such action is not required
Answer
4.1
(202 Votes)
Greta
Veteran · Tutor for 12 years
Answer
B
Explanation
These options present various scenarios regarding the circumstances under which authorisation for deprivation of liberty may be sought. Option A suggests using the urgent pathway rather than the standard method, but this might be inappropriate if the situation doesn't demand rapid action. Option B involves reasonable anticipation, meaning situations where deprivation of liberty is foreseeably required, a circumstance preferable to an emergency action. Option C involves seeking authorisation when a new client begins service, implying a prejudgment about the client's capacity turns up, which is neither fair nor lawful. Basically, you can't deprive somebody's liberty on the preconception they might lack capacity in the future. Option D advises delaying action as much as possible, contradicting principles of protection and prevention underpinning deprivation of liberty as a legal step.