What families mean by “gravitas” (dignity, seriousness, solemnity) does not in fact reside in court architecture, coats of arms, wigs and robes, or rituals of address and behaviour. In my experience, these external manifestations of “justice” can sometimes seem rather ridiculous, and the “performance” element of the courtroom can alienate lay people and distract everyone from the serious business at hand. Rather, the “gravitas” families appreciate is a quality of attention, a focus, a willingness to engage, in depth, with the medico-legal and ethical issues before the court.
Tag Archives: Open Justice
Capacity to engage in sex: Putting the MCA’s foundational values to protect and empower to the test
By Samantha Williamson, 18th March 2022 Most of us couldn’t begin to imagine being told (as adults) that we are prohibited from spending private time with our chosen partner – and that we cannot be allowed to have sex with them. That’s been the case for 19-year-old T and her 25-year-old boyfriend since 19th November 2021. Continue reading “Capacity to engage in sex: Putting the MCA’s foundational values to protect and empower to the test”
Withdrawing treatment after brain-stem death: A case in the Family Division
Today I watched a hearing about whether or not a woman in her 40s is dead. She was declared dead at 11.45 on Thursday 10 March 2022, following brain stem death testing. The reason the doctors have continued to treat the patient and the reason the Trust has applied to court is that the family has opposed withdrawal of ventilation (and other treatments) and has asked for a private second opinion.
When doctors are not willing to offer treatments
By Celia Kitzinger, 13th March 2022 Update – There’s a judgment in this case published following the hearing after this one (before Judd J) London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust v M & Ors (Rev1) [2022] EWCOP 13 This was an unusual hearing because of its focus on a treatment (clinically assisted nutrition) that doctors wereContinue reading “When doctors are not willing to offer treatments”
Advocacy in the William Verden hearing: Observations from a trainee barrister
Court of Protection hearings provide very valuable opportunities to observe the practice and effect of oral and written advocacy from skilled QCs and other barristers. Every trainee barrister would come away stronger after observing a Court of Protection hearing…. This was a profoundly useful hearing to observe as a Bar student.
Best interests and kidney transplantation: Closing submissions in the William Verden case
By Bonnie Venter, 7th March 2022 UPDATE: The judgment in this case is now published: Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust v WV [2022] EWCOP 9 (08 March 2022). Latest news: “Autistic kidney-row teen’s transplant ‘a success’“ This post is about the final day of the hearing concerning whether it is in William Verden’s best interestsContinue reading “Best interests and kidney transplantation: Closing submissions in the William Verden case”
Introducing an upcoming hearing: Is a kidney transplant in his best interests?
A 17y/o with kidney disease, learning disability, autism and ADHD is at the centre of a court decision about a kidney transplant. Bonnie Venter (@TheOrganOgress) will be reporting from court over the next 4 days.
Delay in finding a suitable placement for a young adult with Prader-Willi syndrome
By Aura Mackintosh Bamber, 22 February 2022 For any child’s family, a diagnosis of Prader-Willi Syndrome brings with it a number of responsibilities and worries that are involved in properly caring for and managing this complex disorder. These worries are only exacerbated when a decision is made to deprive that child of their liberty inContinue reading “Delay in finding a suitable placement for a young adult with Prader-Willi syndrome”
Prader-Willi Syndrome and Transparency
A young man with Prader-Willi Syndrome was at the centre of a hearing before Theis J. I can only tell you this because journalist Brian Farmer and I made submissions to the judge saying that we should be allowed to report it and she eventually agreed.
A response to ‘The politics of the pandemic…’: COVID-vaccination of a disabled man
Let me be clear: I also do not know where the evidence points, because the evidence is not reliably available to examine. I do not know this because the supremacy of evidence-based medicine has been lost, which is personally devastating, as I wonder what will happen to evidence, debate, scientific method and freedom to explore uncertainty.
Promoting Open Justice in the Court of Protection 