Court-enforced amputation or patient autonomy?

At the end of the hearing, in her closing summary, Emma Sutton acknowledged that it was a “finely balanced” decision but came down on the side that amputation was NOT in her best interests – most especially as it went counter not only to her current wishes and feelings, but also to her clearly expressed capacitous decisions as recently as last year.  

A best interests decision about contraception and residence

By Jasmine Thomson, 28th April 2021 I am a first-year social work student at Bournemouth University. I was lucky enough to hear about the Open Justice Court of Protection Project through one of our lecturers and was immediately intrigued. So, I arranged to observe a hearing as soon as I could. The hearing I observedContinue reading “A best interests decision about contraception and residence”

A mother abroad and a family dispute – Part 2

By Daniel Cloake, 19 January 2021 As a follower of the Open Justice Court of Protection Project on Twitter I took advantage of their daily publication of upcoming Court of Protection hearings and e-mailed in my request to observe this case. Before MR JUSTICE COHENSitting as a Judge of the Court of ProtectionMonday, 11 January, 2021At 02:00Continue reading “A mother abroad and a family dispute – Part 2”

A mother abroad and a family dispute – Part 1

By Kristy Regan, 11th January 2021 At the third attempt, after a couple of false starts (a case made private at the last minute and an email request not replied to), I gained access to my first Court of Protection hearing: COP 13677853. This was a case at the Royal Courts of Justice before MrContinue reading “A mother abroad and a family dispute – Part 1”

Unwanted amputation and its likely aftermath

By Monica Young, 23 December 2020 Editorial note: You can listen to Nageena Khalique QC, counsel for P talking about this case in a YouTube video: click here. Her account of this case lasts for about four minutes starting at 18:50 minutes into the recording. The hearing that I attended on Thursday 17th December 2020 (Case: 13693467Continue reading “Unwanted amputation and its likely aftermath”

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.”

Privacy, Capacity, and the Judge’s Communication Skills

“Hayden J has been at the forefront of ensuring that the voice of P is heard in the Court of Protection and that P is included in the hearing about them as much as is feasible… This hearing embodied that, with Hayden J taking the lead in ensuring that Ms P’s voice was not only heard but that she fully understood the proceedings. “

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.”

When Expert Evidence Fails

A hearing before Mr Justice Poole (COP 13551368) listed for three days (26-28 October 2020) was adjourned, only part-heard, because of inadequate reports from the expert witness. The expert witness, Dr Q, a consultant psychiatrist, gave evidence that the person at the centre of the case (let’s call her Barbara) lacked mental capacity to make any of the decisions before the court. His evidence simply collapsed under cross-examination.