Coercive and controlling behaviour continuing after brain injury: Matters of finance and contact

By Joanna Booth, 30th November 2022 The person at the centre of this case (PB) is a 65-old woman who had a brain haemorrhage in 2018. This was so severe that it left her with a lasting brain injury and significantly impaired cognitive functions and since leaving hospital she’s been looked after in a specialistContinue reading “Coercive and controlling behaviour continuing after brain injury: Matters of finance and contact”

Reflections from a social worker on a case about capacity for sex: Hull City Council v KF

A key part of effective social work practice is being able to form open and trusting relationships with service users – relationship-based practice can facilitate more effective communication, allowing for transparency and a person-centred approach. Conflict often arises when outcomes don’t match a service users wish, creating a strain on the relationship. One way to rebuild this relationship is to keep the service user informed, ensuring they are aware of decisions being made and the reasons for them.

Capacity to have sexual relations with a specific partner: In the matter of Hull City Council v KF [2022] EWCOP 33

By Aisling Mulligan, 15th August 2022 As a barrister practising in Public Health Law in Ireland, I am familiar with the vulnerable client and the myriad complex questions that come before Courts. Ireland is due to commence the Assisted Decision Making (Capacity) Act 2015 (the 2015 Act), which creates a framework for supporting decision making where aContinue reading “Capacity to have sexual relations with a specific partner: In the matter of Hull City Council v KF [2022] EWCOP 33”

“Abusive” wife agrees to move out of “the matrimonial home” with continuing (albeit restricted) contact with P: An agreed order

By Bridget Penhale, 28th June 2022 After reading previous OJCOP blogs on the circumstances of this case (the most recent is here, and there are two earlier ones) I was keen to attend this hearing (COP 13861341 before Mr. Justice Francis) on Monday 27th June. It concerns a protected party (P) who has dementia and Parkinson’s Disease.   According to theContinue reading ““Abusive” wife agrees to move out of “the matrimonial home” with continuing (albeit restricted) contact with P: An agreed order”

When P can’t go home to his “abusive” wife: Another ineffective hearing

By Celia Kitzinger, 25th June 2022 The protected party at the centre of this case (P) has dementia and Parkinson’s Disease.  He’s in a care home and he wants to return home.  The difficulty is that his wife, who lives in the house of which he is sole owner, is (allegedly) abusive and subjects him to coerciveContinue reading “When P can’t go home to his “abusive” wife: Another ineffective hearing”

Fairness in court for a Litigant in Person

There’s an application for an injunction against P’s wife ordering her to move out of his house in two weeks’ time.  This is because P would like to move back home (he’s currently in residential care) but she is alleged to have abused him.  

Abuse and coercive control? A fact-finding hearing and exoneration

allegations against Miss F. They included allegations of physical and financial abuse and coercive control, and an allegation that she’d deliberately administered an insulin overdose when she visited him in hospital. There were also reports of her being obstructive and hostile to healthcare professionals trying to support Mr G.