Article Text
Statistics from Altmetric.com
A worrying anomaly arose in English law some forty years ago which has never been remedied, namely, that no one—not even a court of law—can consent or refuse on behalf of an incompetent adult. The response of the English courts has been to turn to the practice of “declaring” the lawfulness (or otherwise) of particular courses of conduct—such as medical interventions or withdrawals of treatment—relating to such individuals. This has been, however, a heavy burden for the judicial system to bear, especially since the decision making authority of the medical profession has come under increased scrutiny in recent years. Scotland, for its part, was unaffected by such matters. Instead, it was challenged by an anachronistic system which permitted the court appointment of proxy decision makers, …
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Advance planning in end-of-life care: legal and ethical considerations for neurologists
- Relatives’ knowledge of decision making in intensive care
- Can ‘Best Interests’ derail the trolley? Examining withdrawal of clinically assisted nutrition and hydration in patients in the permanent vegetative state
- Sanctity of life law has gone too far
- Bias from requiring explicit consent from all participants in observational research: prospective, population based study
- Smoking restrictions in the home and secondhand smoke exposure among primary schoolchildren before and after introduction of the Scottish smoke-free legislation
- Ethics briefings
- Safety of candour: how protected are apologies in open disclosure?
- Core requirements for successful data linkage: an example of a triangulation method
- ‘In a twilight world’? Judging the value of life for the minimally conscious patient