Ms Áine Flynn:

I thank the Deputy for her question. It might be helpful to describe the procedure which this intermediate category solution bypasses. Under the 2015 Act there would be a process where there is a question mark over somebody’s capacity and where under that Act, and all the guiding principles it contains, everything has been done to support the person to make his or her own decisions, including decisions around healthcare and treatment. There is then a route to court, which is the Circuit Court, to make a declaration about a person’s capacity in respect of discrete items, which in this case would presumably be consent to treatments for a mental health issue. If the court in that case were to find capacity was lacking it then can make an order appointing a decision-making representative who would then, ideally, be somebody in a pre-existing relationship of trust or failing that, a person appointed from a panel to be maintained by the decision support service who would act within the strict terms of a time-limited decision-making representation order to act as agent, having regard at all times to the person’s will and preferences and who would be in a position to supply the necessary consents if that were to be required. All of that is kept very strictly under review and monitored by the decision support service. There is a well worked out and protected process in place, which this intermediate category designation bypasses, which is the point Ms Keane was making.