By Celia Kitzinger, 9th June 2022 This was an urgent hearing to consider the issue of contact between Mrs M and her son. Until the end of last year, Mrs M, who is in her eighties and has dementia, lived with her son at his home. Her son was her main carer. She’s now livingContinue reading “Conditions on contact between mother and son: Missing P’s voice”
Tag Archives: Transparency
Bringing a very long saga to an end: A final hearing, transparency issues, and delays with a charging decision
By Paige Taylor, 8th June 2022 On 23rd May 2022 I watched a remote hearing (COP 13585739) before Mrs Justice Lieven. I am currently a Bar course student at the Inns of Court College of Advocacy, and I wanted to observe a Court of Protection hearing because I have an interest in mental capacity and disability law, particularlyContinue reading “Bringing a very long saga to an end: A final hearing, transparency issues, and delays with a charging decision”
“What good is it making someone safer if it merely makes them miserable?” A contested hearing and delayed trial of living at home
By Celia Kitzinger, 3 June 2022 The quotation in the title of this blog is (as many readers will recognise) from a judgment by Munby J. In full, the relevant passage reads as follows: A great judge once said, “all life is an experiment,” adding that “every year if not every day we have to wager ourContinue reading ““What good is it making someone safer if it merely makes them miserable?” A contested hearing and delayed trial of living at home”
When family members apply to become parties: A hidden and “private” (but not sinister and secret) hearing
Many people who contact the Open Justice Court of Protection Project believe that the court is deliberately obstructive of open justice. I understand why it can feel like that.
It really isn’t the case that the lists are deliberately designed to discourage us from observing hearings. It’s just that – very often – they have that effect. Having attended this hidden and “private” hearing, I can’t detect any reason why anyone would have sought to exclude me: there was nothing ‘secret’ or ‘sinister’ about it at all.
Challenges in observing a (remote) hearing at Swansea Civil Justice Centre: Capacity for contact and sexual relations
By Celia Kitzinger, 6th May 2022 I had no idea what this hearing would be about. I picked it at random because I had an hour free at 10am on the morning of Friday 22nd April, and thought I could profitably use it to perform my civic duty of supporting open justice in the Court of Protection. Here’sContinue reading “Challenges in observing a (remote) hearing at Swansea Civil Justice Centre: Capacity for contact and sexual relations”
Refusing to eat and declining a feeding tube: Capacity at issue
By Celia Kitzinger, 21st April 2022 The hearing concerned an application from an NHS Trust (represented by David Lawson) to insert a PEG-J tube under general anaesthetic and then to deliver clinically assisted nutrition and hydration (CANH) to a young woman (P) who was admitted to hospital having fractured her femur and is now refusing to eat. She’sContinue reading “Refusing to eat and declining a feeding tube: Capacity at issue”
The value of observing a case management hearing in the Court of Protection
By Helen Moizer, 7th April 2022 The value of observing a case management hearing in the Court of Protection. When I observed a Court of Protection hearing for the first time, I did not know what I was entering into or what to expect. Despite it being a video hearing link, I still felt apprehensiveContinue reading “The value of observing a case management hearing in the Court of Protection”
Two years on: A postscript to “Remote justice”
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.
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.
Challenging behaviours? The importance of language
Referring to NC urinating in his bedroom as a“challenging behaviour” does not (in and of itself) acknowledge the potential medical and social issues that have led to this action. It gives no insight into his character or the unique circumstances that have led up to the current situation. investigations. In using this term, his agency is diminished. It is instead seen as combative force against the agency of the medical staff attempting to assess him.
Promoting Open Justice in the Court of Protection 