A ‘secret’ hearing on life-sustaining treatment

The Health Board was seeking a declaration from the court either [1] that PH does have capacity to refuse nutrition and that his wishes not to continue to be fed should continue to be respected, even if this means his death; OR [2] that PH lacks capacity to refuse nutrition and that it is not in his best interests to attempt to feed him nutrition against his wishes and so he should be allowed to die.

Not quite there yet: My first three attempts to observe a Court of Protection hearing

The Judge then went on to say that as I had only requested access at 10.50pm the evening before, she had not had time to go through formalities.   She then referred to Claire Martin, another public observer (and core member of the Open Justice Court of Protection Project) who was also observing the proceedings and requested that we ‘kindly leave’. So that was that. Abrupt as it was, I duly obliged, and felt slightly down beaten at this point. 

Untenable and unsafe: A trial of living in the community breaks down

So, Mr G will return to the safety of residential care, where he will no doubt continue to rage against his incarceration, but there will be a suitable infrastructure to help him manage his precarious health condition. The question one is left with, of course, is, as Munby J famously said: “What good is making someone safer if it merely makes them miserable?”

Experience of a new witness in the Court of Protection

Recently I was sworn in to give evidence in the Court of Protection as a witness of fact for the first time…. not intimidating…. attending the COP as a witness of fact was a valuable experience before being called in an expert capacity and helped to build my confidence in my skills in defending my opinion and how I can help court consider a patient’s neuropsychology needs. 

Naming a putative ‘expert’ in a COVID vaccination case: A letter to the judge

Videos posted by Dr Rogers online include assertions that masks are ineffective and that it is not “a good thing to do” to have a vaccine unless you are very elderly or vulnerable. 

Fact-finding, ‘magnetic importance’, and the consternation of colleagues: A final hearing adjourned

At the heart of this hearing is the question of whether P can live with her mother, who loves her and wants to care for her. Attempts to elicit P’s wishes and feelings have been unsuccessful, but the social worker has said that “having observed the loving and affectionate relationship that [P] has with her family and that she has been cared for by them throughout her life, it is understood that [P] would wish to continue to stay with her family and be cared for by them”.

“Burdensome and futile” treatment and dignity compromised: Poor practice at a leading UK hospital

The RHN clearly failed to provide high-quality, patient centred care – and part of this Court of Protection judgment is dedicated to exploring why this happened and what lessons might be learned. 

Last-minute vacated hearings in the Court of Protection

By David York, 8th November 2021 For many public observers in the Court of Protection, it will be a familiar experience to request access to a hearing, only to get an email response saying that the hearing has been vacated or adjourned.   This leaves members of the public wondering what actually happened to that caseContinue reading “Last-minute vacated hearings in the Court of Protection”

A COVID Vaccination hearing: Observations of an aspiring medical student

By Eloise Crang, 19th October 2021 I’m a medical applicant, currently sitting my last year of A-levels studying Maths, Chemistry, and Biology, so I was delighted at the opportunity to observe a real-life medical ethics case in play. Having mainly read about these sorts of scenarios in medical books, or when revising for the situationalContinue reading “A COVID Vaccination hearing: Observations of an aspiring medical student”

What happens when Lasting Power of Attorney goes wrong?

“There had been a major family falling out between the LPA and her siblings. They saw her as “controlling”, “aggressive” and “paranoid” and said she had imposed unnecessary restrictions on their right to see their mother.” The judge said, ““I appreciate there’s a family dynamic, and it’s tragic to see it play out”.