KC @39EssexChambers; advisor @MedMediation; member (and ex-employee) @NuffBioethics; Council member @Justicehq; Hon Prof @UCLLaws
Jun 22, 2023 • 23 tweets • 4 min read
A thread about access to hospital for people who don't have capacity to make decisions about medical treatment, and might be too scared to go to hospital even when they are very unwell...
The Supreme Court just rejected an appeal about Article 2 and inquests - the decision is here . This thread is motivated by that decision. It isn't about the law, but about real life.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/…
Oct 22, 2020 • 18 tweets • 3 min read
CQC report 'Out of Sight - Who Cares?' published today cqc.org.uk/publications/t…
Recommendations include: Community teams across the country must have skills in caring for autistic people, and people with a learning disability and/or mental health condition to prevent them from having a crisis, and support
them when they do
Apr 1, 2020 • 6 tweets • 1 min read
New guidance from BMA confirms that decisions not to offer ITU treatment due to scarce resources will not be best interests decisions but public law decisions: beta.bma.org.uk/media/2219/bma…
"...the ethical basis for decisions to restrict ICU admission or to withdraw treatment because of critically short supply are not best interests decisions. These are decisions made on the basis of distributive justice and...
Apr 3, 2019 • 11 tweets • 4 min read
Some information about the Court of Protection and decisions about capacity to consent to sexual relations, for anyone interested in understanding the context to the current press/Twitter commentary....
The Court of Protection has the power to determine whether someone has or does not have capacity to consent to sexual relations. You can read previous cases about this issue on @BAILII , for example: bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCOP… and bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/…
Jan 26, 2018 • 6 tweets • 1 min read
I've had an interesting Twitter conversation about it with various people, but I wouldn't call it commentary. The critical issues that emerged were: 1) whether the criminal conviction was wrong because systemic problems weren't properly accounted for...
2) whether the expert who gave evidence in the criminal proceedings was wrong to say that she made basic errors that no competent doctor should have made (I think on the basis that any competent doctor would have made them in those particular circs)....
