By Jenny Kitzinger, 23rd June 2021 Hearings in the Court of Protection often bring crucial issues into sharp relief in a vivid, poignant and intellectually rigorous way. This was certainly so in the hearing I observed last week: Case No. 1375980T on 10 June 2021. It concerned GU, a 70-year-old man who sustained a severe anoxic brain injury in AprilContinue reading “Clinically-assisted nutrition and hydration: Decisions that cannot be ignored or delayed”
Yearly Archives: 2021
Hillingdon 10 Years on: Another Deprivation of Liberty
EW’s wish to end her days in Inverness may not weigh heavily in the best interests decision that will need to be made if the court decides that she lacks capacity to make her own decision about where to live. I worry that the groundwork for that is already being prepared. There was a weariness whenever Scotland was mentioned.
An urgent court-authorised Caesarean: Seeing behind a published judgment
I can see why planned care for someone in a highly distressed and deteriorating state is attractive on many fronts. However, like the Court, I really struggle with the sense that there seems to have been no attempt to engage openly and honestly with Miss K, at a time when she may have been better placed to consider her wishes and feelings in an inevitably harrowing situation.
Chaos in court and incompetent decision-making: Visual monitoring Part 2
By Claire Martin, 17th June 2021 This hearing, on 6th and 7th May 2021 before HHJ Howells at Wrexham County and Family Court (COP 13575520 Re: B) was the second hearing I’ve observed concerning “David” – a 39-year-old man with a severe learning disability, poorly controlled epilepsy and congenital cerebral palsy with right-sided hemiplegia. At the previous hearing, onContinue reading “Chaos in court and incompetent decision-making: Visual monitoring Part 2”
Happy First Birthday to the Open Justice Court of Protection Project
Celia Kitzinger and Gill Loomes-Quinn, 15th June 2021 One year ago today, on 15th June 2020, we launched the Open Justice Court of Protection Project, a child of the pandemic. It was born of our passionate belief that “publicity is the very soul of justice” at a time when it seemed that the public health emergencyContinue reading “Happy First Birthday to the Open Justice Court of Protection Project”
A junior doctor watches his first hearing
The hearing was about P, a young woman with Down’s Syndrome whose parents had divorced. From what I could make out, this was the case’s first appearance under a ‘Tier 3’ (High Court) judge, but the exact outcomes both parties wanted remained slightly unclear.
Evidence of risk of planned home birth
By James Walker, 11th June 2021 Other experts who have contributed to this Project’s discussion of the Court of Protection case of An Expectant Mother [2021] EWCOP 33 are not alone in the misunderstanding of the data surrounding home births. This is largely due to the fact that the presentation of the data is influencedContinue reading “Evidence of risk of planned home birth”
‘No Entry’: A committal hearing at the RCJ
By Daniel Cloake, 10th June 2021 “It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.’” So reads the infamous line from The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy to justify the assertion that the all-important plans hadContinue reading “‘No Entry’: A committal hearing at the RCJ”
Best interests decisions when P’s views and wishes cannot be determined
The issue at this hearing was (still) whether NW should remain in Dover House, which is what the CCG (who fund her care) argued, supported by the local authority, or whether she should return home, which is what her mother wants.
“An onlooker at someone else’s social event”: A mother’s experience of the court
I don’t understand what was decided at the hearing. I did not get anything like a bit of paper saying “This is what was decided at your court hearing”. I don’t understand why there is another hearing planned for next year. Throughout these months between now and the next hearing my belief is that Lillian is not being given the care that she needs and is not being protected. I just want my daughter to come home.
