Marie Sherlock (Dublin Central, Labour)

I am calling for an urgent and speedy review of the Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Act 2015. Many of us recognise and applaud the intent and ambition of the Act in supposedly giving greater power and autonomy to vulnerable individuals and to significantly increasing the numbers registering enduring power of attorney, EPA. The reality has proved very different, however. I want to relay to the Minister of State the enormous frustration among many people with the operation of the Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Act. This is not about one single piece of the Act but about the operation of both the enduring power of attorney and the operation and bureaucracy around that, the decision-making representative and the process of registration. The frustrations relate to access to the system of registering for an EPA, the cost, the length of the procedure and who recognises it. It is supposed to be a legal document and yet I have accounts of banks, insurance companies and other financial institutions that are refusing to recognise an enduring power of attorney. The anger relates to the decision-making representative piece as well where parents are forced to go to court just to represent the needs and well-being of their adult children or siblings. They have very serious concerns about how onerous the bureaucracy is around all that and the costs, but also in terms of the balance of rights and responsibilities. I believe there are four key concerns.

A number of families told me they have spent thousands of euro trying to complete the process of registering for enduring power of attorney. One family spent €4,800. That is the very opposite of what the Act set out to achieve. It is downright exclusionary of the very people we are seeking to try to help here. We have confusion about the role of the solicitor. Obviously, we have the 2024 practice instruction from the Law Society of Ireland with regard to engaging only with applicants from start to finish as opposed to just for the legal practitioner statement. The Decision Support Service, DSS, told one constituent of mine there are only three solicitors in the country who are willing to do that single piece of the legal practitioner statement. That is contradicted by the replies to parliamentary questions I have received. We need clarity between what the DSS is saying and what the Department of Justice is saying.

Then, we have difficulties with recognising an enduring power of attorney. In one case, a woman had to battle with a fair deal office, then AIB and then Aviva just to have the enduring power of attorney recognised in terms of dealing with her dad's affairs. The Decision Support Service was of zero help in this regard. The process as she described it was absolutely tortuous. Is it any wonder we have seen a reduction in numbers in the EPA process over the past two years?

The other critical point is with regard to the wardship system. By 26 April next year, all wards of court are supposed to exit the system and yet we have seen a very small number of those voluntarily exiting the system. What is going to be done in that regard?

I want to cover the significant issues with regard to the decision-making representative, DMR. I know of one gentleman who went through the courts process, which legal aid did not fully cover, by the way, because he had to pay for the capacity assessment for his sister. He went through all that and then he came to us when he had to submit the initial report, and then what will come up next year is the annual report. It is 34 pages long, it is not downloadable, and it is tortuous in terms of filling out.

I have had parents come to me with very serious concerns about the care of their adult children now within certain institutions in this country because of the Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Act in terms of the level of autonomy in decision-making that is being given to their child, which may actually go against their health and well-being.

See this speech in context