Supporting Innovation in the UK: Care Act 2014. Developments in Social Care Legislation in England and the Medical Innovation Bill.

Abstract

Prior to reform, more than 30 Acts of Parliament were relevant to adult social care (Law Commission 2010, viii). The Commission highlights that the outdated nature of legislation risks Bstifling innovation^ and efforts to promote Bflexibility and new policy approaches in practice^ (Law Commission 2010, 2). Hence its intention to produce a Bsingle, modern statute to which service providers and service users can look to understand whether services can or should be provided^ (Law Commission 2008, 10f). A large amount of primary and secondary legislation will be repealed when the new Act comes into force (Department of Health 2014b, 74f). This, for example, includes the National Assistance Act 1948 and the protection it archaically affords to Bdumb and crippled persons^ (pt III, s 29). However, as the new statute only relates to adults, some legislation will be partially repealed, leaving laws relating to minors in place— e.g., the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970. Thus, there are some limitations on the Law Commission’s efforts to streamline legislation. Beyond simplifying current legislation, a central aim of the new statute is to ensure that legal provision in the area of adult social care fits and is able to inform contemporary health culture in a pertinent manner. In this respect, moves towards Bpersonalisation^ and service user choice have an important place in the legislation (Law Commission 2010, 3f). This emphasis is arguably most apparent in measures like those covering Bdirect payments^—the allocation of a personal budget to those who receive local authority support to allow them to choose how to spend the funds on care (Care Act 2014, pts1, ss 31–33). But the client-centred emphasis of the Act is also evident in the broad statutory principles that underpin it. Bioethical Inquiry (2015) 12:183–187 DOI 10.1007/s11673-015-9637-5