As the hearing ended, JS’s father put a comforting arm around JS’s mother. They both looked upset and anxious. “We just hope your decision brings benefit to our son, rather than more harm”, said his mother. “Mrs S, so do I”, said the judge: “Nobody has a working crystal ball, but I firmly believe it’s the decision that’s best for JS”.
This hearing arose because a hospital trust has applied for welfare orders under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to permit them (i) to perform a full dental clearance on M in hospital under general anaesthetic, and (ii) to use a combination of chemical and physical restraint in order to manage M’s transfer to hospital.
By Thaddeus Mason Pope, 23rd June 2021 On Friday June 11 2021, I had the pleasure of watching The Honorable Mr. Justice Hayden deliver judgment in a Court of Protection case involving the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment. I have been reading Court of Protection judgments for years and have even collected many on my website. But this was my firstContinue reading “Resolving End-of-Life Treatment Conflicts: Comparing the COP in England to Analogous Mechanisms in Ontario, California, and Texas”
“…t is my view that society should be made aware of how it treats its disabled members – and that ‘social invisibility’ is a form of willful ignorance, and an unjust privilege. Oppression thrives in darkness, and it is most efficient and effective in silence and in isolation…”
“…my overriding impression was a sense of outrage at the impact that the delays described were demonstrably having on P and on his quality of life…”
“…The outcome of the judgement is the same for AB, regardless of whether she is deemed to have capacity or not, since NG feeding is judged not to be in her best interests. But a judgement in line with our argument would have given effect to her autonomy and recognised that it is her decision to seek palliative care, rather than a best interests decision made by the judge on her behalf.”
By Celia Kitzinger – 3rd August, 2020 Something exceptional happened in a hearing I observed last week. A judge – it was Mr Justice Cobb – delivered an oral judgment directly to the young woman at the centre of the case, addressing her by name. This was the 53rd hearing I have observed in theContinue reading “Addressing the Oral Judgment to the Person it Most Concerns”
“…The position taken by the Official Solicitor (OS) meant that the Local Authority (the applicant), the NHS Trust (the second respondent) and the OS (the first respondent) all took exactly the same position – all opposed to P’s wishes. It felt very one-sided and as though nobody was arguing for what P wanted, except for P herself…”
By Gill Loomes-Quinn – 16th July 2020 Gill is looking forward to giving a talk about the project, and how we contribute to, and champion the cause of Open Justice in the Court of Protection – at 3.30 pm next Wednesday 22nd July, 2020. This will be as part of the Mental Disability Law –Continue reading “NEWS: Gill Loomes-Quinn will be talking about the Project at the Mental Disability Law – Postgraduate and Early Career Researcher Seminar on Wednesday 22nd July”
“Deaf people who use British Sign Language (BSL) are entitled to an interpreter in court. But what does an interpreter do? What don’t they do? Who needs an interpreter and who does the job?…”