Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards, usually called DoLS, provide legal protection when a care home needs to place continuous supervision and significant restrictions on a resident who cannot consent to those arrangements.
DoLS applies to people aged 18 or over in registered care homes and hospitals in England and Wales. It forms part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and is intended to ensure that restrictions are necessary, proportionate, in the person’s best interests and independently reviewed.
A DoLS authorisation does not give a care home unlimited control over a resident. It authorises a particular deprivation of liberty under specified conditions and for a limited period. The home must still use the least restrictive arrangements reasonably available.
A person can appear settled, have supportive relatives and receive excellent care while still being deprived of their liberty in the legal sense. DoLS is a safeguard rather than an accusation that the home has done something wrong.
What is a deprivation of liberty?
There is no single list of restrictions that automatically creates a deprivation of liberty. The resident’s complete care arrangements and their practical effect must be considered.
For adults who lack capacity to consent to their care, the key questions are usually whether the person:
- is under continuous supervision and control; and
- is not free to leave.
This is often called the “acid test”, following a UK Supreme Court judgment. “Not free to leave” does not mean the person must be physically attempting to walk out. The question is whether staff would allow them to leave permanently if they tried or whether they would be stopped and returned.
Continuous supervision and control may involve staff making most important decisions about:
- where the resident lives;
- when they can leave the building;
- who accompanies them outside;
- personal care;
- medication;
- meals and daily routines;
- access to parts of the building;
- contact with other people;
- the management of behaviour or risk.
The resident’s agreement, apparent happiness or lack of objection does not necessarily mean there is no deprivation of liberty. Neither does the fact that the arrangements are comfortable, necessary or similar to those experienced by other residents.
What restrictions might lead to a DoLS application?
Care-home restrictions may amount to a deprivation of liberty when they operate together and are sufficiently intensive.
Examples include:
- locked external doors or coded exits the resident cannot use;
- staff preventing the resident from leaving alone;
- constant or very frequent observation;
- the resident being returned if they try to leave;
- restrictions on where the resident may go within the home;
- regular physical intervention or restraint;
- bed rails, sensor equipment or positioning devices that limit movement;
- medication used partly to manage behaviour;
- staff exercising substantial control over visits or contact;
- the person being unable to move elsewhere despite expressing a wish to do so.
Not every locked door, sensor mat or supervised outing amounts to a deprivation of liberty. A short, proportionate restriction may instead be authorised under the broader Mental Capacity Act when it is necessary to prevent harm.
The cumulative effect matters. Several individually modest restrictions can together create continuous supervision and control.
Who can be subject to DoLS?
DoLS may be relevant when a care-home resident:
- is aged 18 or over;
- has a mental disorder within the meaning used by the safeguards;
- lacks capacity to consent to their accommodation and care arrangements;
- is under continuous supervision and control;
- is not free to leave;
- is not subject to another legal framework that makes DoLS inapplicable;
- has no valid decision or authority that conflicts with the proposed arrangements.
Residents affected may have dementia, a learning disability, an acquired brain injury, severe mental illness or another condition affecting their ability to make the particular decision.
A diagnosis alone does not establish lack of capacity. Capacity must be considered for the specific decision at the relevant time.
What does lacking capacity mean?
Under the Mental Capacity Act, a person should be assumed to have capacity unless it is established otherwise. A resident does not lack capacity merely because they make an unusual, risky or unwise choice.
For the decision about accommodation and care, the assessment considers whether an impairment or disturbance of the mind or brain means the person cannot:
- understand the relevant information;
- retain it long enough to make the decision;
- use or weigh it when deciding; or
- communicate their decision by any means.
The resident should receive practicable support before being treated as unable to decide. This may involve simple language, pictures, hearing support, an interpreter, familiar people or choosing a time when the person is most alert.
Capacity can fluctuate. A person may also have capacity for some decisions but not for the overall care and residence arrangements.
Who applies for a DoLS authorisation?
The care home is known as the managing authority. It is responsible for recognising a possible deprivation of liberty and requesting authorisation.
The application is sent to the supervisory body, which is normally the local authority responsible for the DoLS process. This is not necessarily the council paying the resident’s care-home fees.
The home should apply before the deprivation begins when it can be planned. For example, this may be possible before admitting a resident from hospital when the proposed restrictions are already known.
If restrictions have already become necessary, the home can issue itself an urgent authorisation while requesting a standard authorisation.
Relatives do not make the application, although they can raise concerns with the care home or local authority. If a family member believes a resident is being deprived of liberty without authorisation, they should ask the manager:
- whether a DoLS application has been made;
- when it was submitted;
- whether an urgent authorisation is in place;
- which local authority is dealing with it;
- how current restrictions are being reviewed.
What is an urgent authorisation?
A care home can give itself an urgent authorisation when a deprivation of liberty is already occurring or must begin before the standard process can be completed.
An urgent authorisation generally lasts for up to seven days. The supervisory body can extend it once, for up to a further seven days, when there are exceptional reasons and the standard assessment cannot be completed in time.
An urgent authorisation should not be used routinely because a care home failed to plan. It does not remove the need to request a standard authorisation at the same time.
What is a standard authorisation?
A standard authorisation is issued by the supervisory body after the required assessments have been completed and all qualifying requirements are met.
It can last for up to 12 months, although it should be authorised for no longer than the circumstances justify. The assessor may recommend a shorter period or attach conditions.
The care home must apply again before the authorisation expires if the deprivation is expected to continue.
What assessments are completed?
Six qualifying requirements must be assessed before a standard authorisation can be granted.
| Assessment | What it considers |
|---|---|
| Age | Whether the person is aged 18 or over |
| Mental health | Whether the person has a mental disorder for the purposes of DoLS |
| Mental capacity | Whether the person lacks capacity to consent to the relevant accommodation and care |
| Best interests | Whether deprivation is occurring, is necessary to prevent harm and is proportionate to the likelihood and seriousness of that harm |
| Eligibility | Whether another legal framework, particularly the Mental Health Act, makes DoLS unavailable |
| No refusals | Whether the arrangements conflict with a valid advance decision, attorney or Court of Protection deputy decision |
The assessments are normally carried out by at least two trained professionals:
- a best interests assessor; and
- a mental health assessor, usually a doctor with the required approval or experience.
The assessors should consult the resident, care-home staff, relatives, friends, attorneys, deputies and other professionals who know the person.
The process should consider the resident’s current and past wishes, feelings, beliefs and values. A person’s preferences remain important even when they cannot make the final decision themselves.
What does the best-interests assessor examine?
The best-interests assessor considers whether the legal acid test is met and whether the arrangements are necessary and proportionate.
They may examine:
- why the resident needs supervision;
- what harm could occur without the restrictions;
- how likely and serious that harm is;
- which restrictions are being used;
- whether they are effective;
- whether less restrictive alternatives have been tried;
- the resident’s objections and preferences;
- the effect on family contact and community life;
- whether another placement could meet the person’s needs with fewer restrictions.
The assessor can recommend that the authorisation contains conditions. For example, a condition might require the home to arrange more community access, review a particular restriction or explore another placement.
What happens after DoLS is authorised?
The local authority should provide written information explaining:
- that the authorisation has been granted;
- when it starts and ends;
- which care setting it covers;
- any conditions attached to it;
- the resident’s rights;
- how to request a review;
- how to challenge the authorisation.
The resident must have a relevant person’s representative, often shortened to RPR. This may be a suitable relative or friend, or a paid representative when nobody appropriate is available.
The representative’s role is to:
- keep in regular contact with the resident;
- help them understand the authorisation;
- support their wishes and rights;
- request a review when circumstances change;
- help challenge the authorisation in the Court of Protection when appropriate.
The care home must follow any conditions and continue reviewing whether restrictions remain necessary. An authorisation is not permission to add unrelated restrictions without assessment.
The resident should be supported to exercise as much choice and independence as possible. A detailed care plan should explain how staff will manage risks while preserving autonomy. See our guide to care plans in care homes for the information families can expect.
Can family members consent instead of using DoLS?
Ordinary relatives cannot legally consent to a deprivation of liberty on behalf of an adult simply because they are the next of kin. “Next of kin” is not a general decision-making status under the Mental Capacity Act.
A health and welfare attorney or Court of Protection deputy may have authority to make certain decisions, depending on the wording and scope of their appointment. However, an attorney cannot simply remove the person’s right to the legal safeguards required for a deprivation of liberty.
The attorney or deputy should be consulted and the no-refusals assessment must consider whether the proposed arrangements conflict with a valid decision made within their authority.
Family agreement does not make DoLS unnecessary. Equally, family disagreement does not automatically mean the resident must leave. The focus remains on the resident’s rights, capacity, wishes and best interests.
Our guide to power of attorney and care decisions explains what attorneys can and cannot decide.
Can a resident or family challenge a DoLS authorisation?
Yes. A resident does not lose the right to challenge their detention because an assessor believes the placement is in their best interests.
The resident, representative or another concerned person can ask the supervisory body to review the authorisation. A review may be appropriate when:
- the resident appears to have regained capacity;
- the resident is objecting to the placement or restrictions;
- the care arrangements have changed substantially;
- restrictions are no longer necessary;
- a less restrictive option has become available;
- conditions are not being followed;
- the resident no longer meets one of the qualifying requirements.
The authorisation can also be challenged in the Court of Protection under section 21A of the Mental Capacity Act. The court can examine whether the qualifying requirements are met, whether the authorisation should continue, its length and its conditions.
A resident who wishes to challenge should receive practical support to do so, even if relatives or professionals believe the current placement is best.
Is legal aid available?
Non-means-tested legal aid is generally available for eligible challenges brought by the person deprived of liberty or their relevant person’s representative under section 21A. A specialist community-care or Court of Protection solicitor can advise on the exact position.
Families should not assume that going to court means accusing the care home of neglect. The Court of Protection provides independent legal oversight when a person’s liberty is at stake.
What is a section 39D IMCA?
An Independent Mental Capacity Advocate may be appointed under section 39D to support the resident or their unpaid representative with the DoLS process.
The advocate can help them:
- understand the authorisation and its conditions;
- request a review;
- raise concerns about the care arrangements;
- consider a Court of Protection challenge;
- access legal advice.
A paid representative is independent of the care home and should have the knowledge needed to protect the resident’s rights.
When must the authorisation be reviewed or ended?
A DoLS authorisation should not simply remain unchanged until its expiry date. The managing authority and supervisory body have continuing responsibilities.
A review should be considered if:
- the resident’s capacity changes;
- their mental-health condition changes;
- they begin objecting more clearly or frequently;
- the level of supervision increases or decreases;
- a significant restriction is introduced or removed;
- their physical health changes;
- a new placement or less restrictive care option becomes available;
- an attorney, deputy or advance decision affects the arrangements;
- a condition attached to the authorisation is not being met.
The authorisation ends if the person no longer meets the qualifying requirements, leaves the care home permanently, dies or reaches the authorisation’s expiry date without renewal.
An authorisation applies to the named setting. If the resident moves permanently to another care home, the new home normally needs to consider and request its own authorisation.
A short hospital admission does not necessarily terminate the care-home placement arrangements, but the hospital must consider its own legal responsibilities if it deprives the person of liberty while they are there.
What should families ask the care home?
Families can ask direct, neutral questions without treating DoLS as evidence of poor care.
Useful questions include:
- What restrictions are currently being used?
- Why does the home believe they are necessary?
- Has the resident’s capacity to consent been assessed?
- Has a DoLS application been made?
- Is an urgent or standard authorisation currently in force?
- When does it expire?
- Are any conditions attached?
- Who is the relevant person’s representative?
- How is the resident supported to leave the home safely?
- What less restrictive options have been considered?
- How are objections recorded and responded to?
- When was the care plan last reviewed?
Ask to see relevant documents if you have legal authority or the resident consents. Confidentiality still applies, so the home may need to establish what information it can share.
DoLS does not replace safeguarding procedures. Concerns about neglect, abuse, excessive restraint, inappropriate medication or unexplained injury should be raised separately. Our guide to safeguarding adults in care homes explains how to report and escalate concerns.
Broader warning signs are covered in care-home red flags families should not ignore.
What happens if there is no authorisation?
If the care arrangements meet the acid test and no valid authorisation or court order is in place, the resident may be unlawfully deprived of liberty.
Families or professionals can:
- raise the issue with the care-home manager;
- ask whether an application has been submitted;
- contact the local authority’s DoLS team;
- request advocacy support;
- obtain advice from a specialist solicitor;
- raise a safeguarding concern if the restrictions are unsafe, excessive or abusive;
- use the provider’s complaints procedure and contact the relevant regulator where appropriate.
In England, the Care Quality Commission monitors whether registered services comply with legal requirements, but it does not grant DoLS authorisations or decide individual Court of Protection disputes. In Wales, Care Inspectorate Wales regulates care services.
A delayed local-authority assessment does not allow the home to ignore the resident’s rights. The home should continue reviewing restrictions, use the least restrictive approach and keep clear records while pursuing the application.
If you need to complain about the provider’s actions, see our guide to care-home complaints and escalation.
Does DoLS apply throughout the UK?
No. DoLS under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 applies in England and Wales.
Scotland has a different legal framework, including the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000 and mental-health legislation. Northern Ireland has its own Mental Capacity Act and deprivation-of-liberty arrangements.
Families should obtain advice based on the nation where the person is receiving care rather than assuming that English or Welsh DoLS procedures apply throughout the UK.
Have Liberty Protection Safeguards replaced DoLS?
No. The Mental Capacity (Amendment) Act 2019 created a proposed replacement system called Liberty Protection Safeguards, or LPS. However, implementation was delayed and DoLS remains the operative system for care homes and hospitals in England and Wales.
Care providers should continue following current DoLS law and guidance unless and until a formal change comes into force.
What about supported living or care at home?
The DoLS administrative process cannot authorise deprivation of liberty in supported living, shared lives, an ordinary private home or another community setting outside a registered care home or hospital.
Where community arrangements amount to a deprivation of liberty, authorisation may need to come from the Court of Protection. Legal advice may be appropriate, particularly if the person objects or the arrangements are disputed.
Frequently asked questions
Does DoLS mean the care home has done something wrong?
No. A properly requested authorisation shows that the home has recognised restrictions may amount to a deprivation of liberty and is seeking the required independent oversight. Problems arise when restrictions are unnecessary, disproportionate, poorly reviewed or left unauthorised.
Does a locked care home always require DoLS?
Not automatically for every resident. The practical effect on each individual must be considered. A resident who has capacity and freely consents to living there is not deprived of liberty under DoLS simply because an external door is locked.
Can someone have capacity but still be subject to DoLS?
No. One of the requirements is that the person lacks capacity to consent to the relevant accommodation and care arrangements. Other legal powers may apply in different circumstances.
Can dementia automatically justify deprivation of liberty?
No. Dementia does not automatically establish lack of capacity or make every restriction necessary. The person and the specific arrangements must be assessed individually.
Can family members take the resident out?
That depends on the care plan, risks, the authorisation’s conditions and the resident’s wishes. DoLS does not automatically ban outings. The home should support contact and community access using the least restrictive safe arrangements.
Can a resident be stopped from returning home?
If the resident lacks capacity and leaving would expose them to serious harm, staff may prevent departure under authorised and proportionate arrangements. However, a persistent wish to go home should not be dismissed as “just dementia”. It must be recorded, explored and may justify a review or court challenge.
Does an attorney replace the need for DoLS?
No. A health and welfare attorney should be consulted and may make decisions within their authority, but cannot remove the resident’s entitlement to lawful authorisation and safeguards.
How long can a DoLS authorisation last?
A standard authorisation can last for up to 12 months, but it may be granted for a shorter period. It must end earlier if the qualifying requirements are no longer met.
What happens when an authorisation expires?
The care home must request a further authorisation in good time if the deprivation is expected to continue. An expired authorisation does not continue automatically.
Can conditions be attached to DoLS?
Yes. Conditions should relate to the deprivation of liberty and may require the home to change or review aspects of the care arrangements. The home must comply with them.
Can DoLS authorise treatment?
DoLS authorises the deprivation of liberty, not every individual treatment decision. Medical treatment must still have its own lawful basis under consent, the Mental Capacity Act, the Mental Health Act or another relevant framework.
Who pays for the DoLS assessment?
The resident and family are not charged for the local authority’s DoLS assessment or authorisation process.
Can DoLS affect care-home fees or funding?
A DoLS authorisation does not itself decide who pays for care. Local-authority means testing, NHS Continuing Healthcare and private funding are separate processes. Our guide to NHS Continuing Healthcare explains when the NHS may fund the complete care package.
Where can families get further help?
Families can contact the care-home manager, the local authority’s DoLS team, an Independent Mental Capacity Advocate, a specialist solicitor or an appropriate advice organisation. The Social Care Institute for Excellence also provides an overview of Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
