Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Tuesday, 14 June 2022

Select Committee on Children and Youth Affairs

Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) (Amendment) Bill 2022: Committee Stage

Photo of Jennifer WhitmoreJennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

This amendment deletes the Minister's proposal to remove treatment decisions from enduring power of attorneys, EPAs. Separating decisions about healthcare treatment and enduring powers of attorney will create additional complications for individuals. In essence, if someone wants to plan his or her healthcare decisions in advance, he or she would have to create not one but two instruments, which are an enduring power of attorney and an advance healthcare directive. These would then necessitate two separate requirements for supporting evidence, witnesses for each instrument and separate assessments of capacity to make both instruments, since capacity is to be assessed in a decision-specific manner under the legislation.

It was pointed out to us that these types on instruments would need to be put in place soon after a life-changing diagnosis of dementia, for example. Now, the Government is forcing people to go through two processes. It is useful to quote from the pre-legislative scrutiny report on this issue:

The most widely opposed measure in relation to Enduring Power of Attorneys was the proposed removal of treatment decisions. This proposal received widespread criticism. DPOs, legal experts, advocacy organisations and others argued that this would be less accessible, more complex and inefficient. It was put that it will discourage people from using EPAs and increase costs, as those who wish to have the full range of their advance wishes protected will have to make two arrangements: an EPA and an AHD.

Why is the Minister complicating the issue? People directly affected and advocates have highlighted this move as creating obstacles for people. Some people may want to create separate enduring power of attorneys and advance healthcare directives and the law should allow that, but it should not force everyone down a more complicated route against their will. If this Bill is serious about respecting people's preferences, it needs to empower people and not force them to jump through additional hoops.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.