This piece by Sophie Borland in the Daily Mail, bearing the title Tied to chairs, sedated or locked up, the ordeal faced by thousands with dementia is one of the most irresponsible articles I’ve read for a long while. I’m not a natural Daily Mail reader, so it’s an occasional visit only that ever I make. I understand now more of the reasons behind my allergy to the Daily Mail.
It’s scaremongering sensationalism gone beyond acceptable limits, preying upon the expectation that the majority of readers may not have read the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards in full or in part, let alone having tracked down the NHS statistics quoted and then taking the time to read each and every connected download. Sophie Borland may not have researched, either, the way that DoLS are not all about being ‘tied to a chair’ or ‘being locked up’, with or without dementia. I’m well aware of the fact that the DoLS procedures are not well understood by some Local Authorities, by some care providers, and even by some Social Workers. But the use of restraint is not, I think, the main focus of the majority of DoLS applications (granted or refused) where dementia is concerned. Or am I being naive here? I’m not normally that gullible, but perhaps the DM knows different.
Shame on you, Daily Mail, for your careless and carefree journalism, as I view it in my perhaps simplicity.