Medical treatment for people with learning disabilities: Telling Robert Bourn’s story and the challenges of ‘transparency’

The initial response of his treating team, says his mother, was to say there were no treatment options.  Comfort measures only were proposed and a palliative care referral was made.

“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”

A short hearing and a failure to agree

Learning from the experiences of Litigants in Person and the difficulties they have navigating the legal system, in personal and emotive circumstances, is vital to supporting future Litigants in Person, particularly in light of reduced legal aid funding.

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.  

Caesarean: An emergency hearing

More than anything, I hope for better advance planning for pregnant women with mental health challenges in the future, so that they can exercise their right to bodily autonomy (even if that means making decisions that others see as unwise or morally repugnant) and can have their wishes and feelings fully acknowledged and respected in best interests decisions made about them.