Covid vaccination in the Court of Protection

By Bonnie Venter, Monday 15th February 2021 Editorial notes: (1) For a different perspective on this same hearing, see the blog by Bridget Penhale (click here); (2) The judgment has now been published SD v Royal Borough of Kensington And Chelsea [2021] EWCOP 14 (10 February 2021) As an academic researching and teaching Medical Law,Continue reading “Covid vaccination in the Court of Protection”

Refusing kidney dialysis – a daughter’s reflections

“When I asked for access to observe a hearing in the Court of Protection, I had no idea how close to home the key issue would turn out to be. …. The person at the centre of the case, AI, has end stage kidney disease. .. he’ll probably refuse to come back in for dialysis. This could mean that he dies…. My father died just over a year ago (in his mid 70s) because he, too, refused dialysis.”

Advance decisions on intimacy

“the proposal gives rise to strong feelings [and] poses challenges to conceptions of what we are willing to empower people to decide about in advance, and about how expressions of sexual preference could be ‘housed’ within such decisions where they may clash with the views of others around the person about what they consider to be acceptable.”

Should life-sustaining treatment be continued?

“Nine public observers attended (via MS Teams) an all-day hearing in the Court of Protection before Mr Justice Poole (COP 1353507, 30 October 2020) concerning whether or not life-sustaining treatment should be continued…”

Psychiatric Survivors’ Views on Advance Consent and ‘Forced’ Treatment

“… I remain hopeful that by highlighting cases such as Paul’s and learning from lived experiences of psychiatric survivors, we can make small steps that will lead to better experiences of treatment for those in mental health crisis.”

Influencing ‘best interests’ decisions: An eloquent incapacitious P

“Many of us may be deemed by the courts to lack capacity to make key decisions about our own lives at a point where we believe ourselves entitled to make decisions for ourselves – indeed the very loss of insight that can come with brain injury may render us completely unable to recognise our own limitations. Like Mr G, we may fight (and lose) an argument that we are capacitous.”

A Decision about Capacity

Ruth was not in court. She was represented in court by a barrister appointed and instructed via the Official Solicitor. Her barrister reported that “Ruth is very clear in her own mind that she does not lack capacity to make these decisions”. But he did not argue on her behalf that the court should accept that she has capacity.