Page 9 - Community Living Magazine 32 - 4

legal: coercive control

and reflective intervention had been
missed.
The council endorsed the view of
Meyers’ advocate that his relationship
with his son was “codependent”. Meyers
told the judge that his son was “basically a
good lad” and that “he was not as bad as
people made out”.
The judge summed up the position by
saying that Meyers had a “real resolve to
live and thrive” with an “unfailingly
positive” attitude and, despite his physical
limitations, “engages with the world and
the issues of the day”.
He added: “There are times when Mr
Meyers is vociferously critical towards his
son … There has been at least one occasion
when Mr Meyers has locked his room to
keep his son out. He effectively asserts his The court’s decision to encroach on Meyers’ personal autonomy was “justified and proportionate”
own autonomy by protecting himself.” as his son’s action were “not merely … neglectful but abusive and corrosive of his dignity”
The judge nevertheless maintained the
injunction until any further order was of medical evidence of mental disorder The judgment spoke of the “needy,
made, binding him not to live in his own without infringing the EHCR. irrational and frequently out of control”
bungalow nor to live with his son, and to This man was a vulnerable adult on this son exerting an “insidious and pervasive”
stay at a care home specified by the footing and unquestionably in need of influence on the father, who clearly loved
council. protection. So, by December, expert him. The relationship between the two had
The Court of Appeal refused permission evidence of his capacity notwithstanding, become “so enmeshed that the autonomy
to appeal against that interim order, and there was prima facie evidence of an of each has been compromised … In
ruled that such orders could be deployed unsound mind by reason of his infirmity reality, the son exerts an influence over
for the protection of vulnerable adults, and other “extraneous circumstances”. his father which is malign in its effect if
even if they were not incapacitated by People found not to be of unsound not in its intention. The consequence is to
mental disorder or mental illness, if it was mind cannot be detained in circumstances disable Mr Meyers from making a truly
reasonably believed they were under that amount to a deprivation of a liberty, informed decision which impacts directly
constraint or subject to coercion and but a move home in these circumstances on his health and survival.”
therefore deprived of the capacity to was something that required very careful The son’s treatment of his father was
make the relevant decision, make a free planning and support, and delaying that described as “not merely … neglectful but
choice or consent. Where the influence is by injunction was entirely consistent with abusive and corrosive of his dignity”. For
that of a parent or other close and the man’s overall human rights. this reason, the court’s decision to encroach
dominating relative, it may be “subtle and on Meyers’ personal autonomy was “a
powerful” and “very little pressure may Final hearing justified and proportionate intervention”.
The judge added “the preservation of a
suffice to bring about the desired result”. A final hearing was held in February 2019. human life will always weigh heavily when
“ prevented from living with his son and the evaluating issues of this kind”. He
The outcome was that Meyers was
concluded: “Mr Meyers may live in his own
son’s contact with him was restricted.
Where the influence is
The orders needed would restrict
bungalow, with an appropriate package of
that of a close relative,
very little pressure may Meyers’ choices, but not his liberty; the supportive care, conditional upon his son’s
exclusion from the property”, and this
son’s influence was disabling the father
from making a truly informed decision.
restriction on his autonomy was
suffice to bring about the
The implications of this case are:” care would put the father’s life in jeopardy under article 8 of the ECHR, concerning
proportionate with regard to his rights
Returning home without appropriate
desired result
because, even if there was no clear
respect for private and family life. n
evidence of the son forcing his father to
● Southend-On-Sea Borough Council v
February 2019) www.bailii.org/ew/cases/
relationship occludes Mr Meyers’s ability
● ●In such circumstances, the court is act against his will, “the intensity of this Meyers [2019] EWHC 399 (Fam) (20
bound by the ECHR and its case law and to take rational and informed decisions”. EWHC/Fam/2019/399.html
must only impose orders that are
Meyers was effectively compelled to evict
Fayerollinson/Wikimedia Commons ● ●In certain circumstances, it may be return there at all. This was not inconsistent Belinda Schwehr is chief executive of
necessary and proportionate, and have
his son from home or would be unable to
proper regard to personal autonomy
legal advice charity CASCAIDr (www.
with his human rights, because, the court
CASCAIDr.org.uk) and owner of the
appropriate for a court to take or maintain noted, it was evident that Meyers was
Care & Health Law consultancy. She
determined to keep well and continue
interim protective measures while
has been a barrister, solicitor advocate
carrying out all necessary investigations
living, and his life would be jeopardised by
●In an emergency, someone may be
●
of care while his son remained there.
deprived of their liberty in the absence
Community Living Vol 32 No 4 | Summer 2019 9
www.cl-initiatives.co.uk going home without an appropriate package and university law lecturer