MKM

Case [2021] NSWCATGD 24


NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: MKM [2021] NSWCATGD 24
Hearing dates: 18 June 2021
Date of orders: 18 June 2021
Decision date: 18 June 2021
Jurisdiction:Guardianship Division
Before: S G McCarthy, Senior Member (Legal)
Dr G Jamieson, Senior Member (Professional)
S Fogg, General Member (Community)
Decision:

1. A guardianship order is made for MKM.

2. The Public Guardian is appointed as the guardian.

3. This is a continuing guardianship order for a period of 12 months from 18 June 2021.

4. This is a limited guardianship order giving the guardian(s) custody of MKM to the extent necessary to carry out the functions below.

FUNCTIONS:

5. The guardian has the following functions:

a) Health care

To decide what health care MKM may receive.

b) Medical/Dental consent

To make substitute decision about proposed minor or major medical or dental treatment, where MKM is not capable of giving a valid consent.

c) Restrictive Practices

To give or withhold consent as to whether the following restrictive practices should be used to influence MKM’s behaviour:

1. Chemical restraint

CONDITIONS:

6. The conditions of this order are:

a) Standard Condition

In exercising this role the guardian shall take all reasonable steps to bring MKM to an understanding of the issues and to obtain and consider his views before making significant decisions.

b) Restrictive Practices

The guardians(s) may only consent to the use of the types of restrictive practices permitted under this order to influence MKM’s behaviour.

(i) as a last resort to prevent MKM harming himself or others; and

(ii) in accordance with a care and support plan that incorporates:

a) the behaviours that are being addressed by the restraints;

b) reasons why the restraints are necessary;

c) non-pharmacological strategies in place;

d) provision for review, including by an appropriate medical specialist.

Catchwords:

GUARDIANSHIP – application for a guardianship order – whether subject person is a person in need of a guardian – subject person has depression – subject person living in supported accommodation – need for medication to deal with aggressive behaviours – restrictive practices function – chemical restraint – need for medical and dental consent decisions – need for healthcare and services decisions – no private guardian available – Public Guardian appointed – order made.

Legislation Cited:

Guardianship Act 1987 (NSW), ss 3(1)-(2), 4, 14, 14(2)

Cases Cited:

IF v IG [2004] NSWADTAP 3

Texts Cited:

None cited.

Category:Principal judgment
Parties:

006: Guardianship Application

MKM (the person)
ZYT (applicant)
Public Guardian
Representation: Nil.
File Number(s): NCAT 2011/00419763
Publication restriction: Decisions of the Guardianship Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal have been anonymised to remove any information that may identify any person involved in the Tribunal’s proceedings: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW), s 65.

REASONS FOR DECISION

GUARDIANSHIP APPLICATION

What the Tribunal decided

  1. The Tribunal appointed the Public Guardian as the guardian for MKM for a period of 12 months to make decisions about his health care, medical and dental treatment and restrictive practices…

Continue reading MKM

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
MKM [2021] NSWCATGD 24
Case
[2021] NSWCATGD 24
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

MKM applied for a guardianship order in relation to themselves, citing their need for assistance due to their depression and living situation. The Court had to determine whether MKM was a person in need of a guardian and if so, what type of guardianship order should be made. The application was supported by evidence from MKM's mental health practitioner, who highlighted the necessity for medication to manage aggressive behaviors and the requirement for consent decisions regarding medical and dental treatment.

The Court found that MKM met the criteria for a person in need of a guardian, considering their living situation in supported accommodation and the need for ongoing medication and consent decisions. The Court also acknowledged the absence of a private guardian and the necessity for the Public Guardian to be appointed. The Court concluded that a limited guardianship order was appropriate, focusing on specific functions such as healthcare, medical and dental consent, and restrictive practices like chemical restraint, subject to strict conditions. The order includes a standard condition that the guardian must consider MKM's views before making significant decisions and a condition that restrictive practices should only be used as a last resort and in accordance with a care and support plan.

The final order appointed the Public Guardian as MKM's guardian for a period of 12 months, with specific functions related to healthcare and consent, and outlined conditions for the use of restrictive practices. The Court emphasized the importance of involving MKM in decision-making processes and ensuring that any restrictive practices are used responsibly and in line with a well-documented care plan.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. A guardianship order is made for MKM.

2. The Public Guardian is appointed as the guardian.

3. This is a continuing guardianship order for a period of 12 months from 18 June 2021.

4. This is a limited guardianship order giving the guardian(s) custody of MKM to the extent necessary to carry out the functions below.

FUNCTIONS:

5. The guardian has the following functions:

a) Health care

To decide what health care MKM may receive.

b) Medical/Dental consent

To make substitute decision about proposed minor or major medical or dental treatment, where MKM is not capable of giving a valid consent.

c) Restrictive Practices

To give or withhold consent as to whether the following restrictive practices should be used to influence MKM’s behaviour:

1. Chemical restraint

CONDITIONS:

6. The conditions of this order are:

a) Standard Condition

In exercising this role the guardian shall take all reasonable steps to bring MKM to an understanding of the issues and to obtain and consider his views before making significant decisions.

b) Restrictive Practices

The guardians(s) may only consent to the use of the types of restrictive practices permitted under this order to influence MKM’s behaviour.

(i) as a last resort to prevent MKM harming himself or others; and

(ii) in accordance with a care and support plan that incorporates:

a) the behaviours that are being addressed by the restraints;

b) reasons why the restraints are necessary;

c) non-pharmacological strategies in place;

d) provision for review, including by an appropriate medical specialist.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.