Safeguards to protect some of society's most weak people are "not match for goal", leading mental well being consultants have advised the BBC. Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards , exterior(DoLS) ought to give people deemed not to have mental capacity the suitable to problem their detention by the state. But a Mental Health Alliance, external report will say the arrangements are bureaucratic and wasteful. The federal government has said it can look fastidiously at the report's findings. The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) were introduced into English and Welsh law in April 2009 and apply to individuals over the age of 18 who are in care houses or hospitals. Those establishments have to use for an unbiased assessment of anyone in their care who lacks mental capability and is thought to be at risk of hurt if they don't seem to be deprived of their liberty. The safeguards embody giving these detained, or their families, the right to challenge the restrictions, first domestically by way of a assessment, and in the end within the Court of Protection, exterior. However the report from the Mental Health Alliance, which represents quite a lot of charities working in this discipline, will warn the scheme is "extremely bureaucratic, wasteful, and the burdensome paperwork itself discourages many local authorities from using the laws". Speaking to BBC Radio 4's The Report, exterior, the author of the Mental Health Alliance research Roger Hargreaves warns of large variation within the number of DoLS taken out by native councils across the country. In the 2 years since they were introduced, West Sussex, for example, made 206 authorisations while Hull made none. The damning report follows controversial cases like that of Steven Neary, a 21-year-old autistic man who was kept in a care unit for a 12 months towards his and his father's wishes. Over the course of 2010, Hillingdon Council issued a lot of customary authorisations for a Deprivation of Liberty on Steven Neary, regardless that, importantly, there was a less restrictive possibility for his care accessible at home. The legislation is just not meant for use as a power by a local authority to detain someone towards their needs when other choices are available. Instead, it is meant to authorise restrictions in someone's care plan which can be both necessary and in that person's greatest pursuits. Crucially, the legislation is meant to supply safeguards so that the individual can challenge their scenario. In Steven Neary's case, a High Court choose dominated that Hillingdon had unlawfully deprived him of his liberty and had not adopted the right procedures. It's sophisticated. What is deprivation of liberty? Robust deprivation of liberty safeguards are an essential safety for weak individuals.