Autonomy and Consent Flashcards
What happened in - Bland [1993]
if P has capacity their wishes must be respected
shows the laws prioritisation of respect for autonomy over sanctity of life re best interests
what happened in - Re B [2002]
P had capacity and therefore their decision to refuse ventilation needs to be complied with regardless it would ultimately lead to her death
What happened in - Brady (2001)
MH P was hunger striking and it was held that ANH could be provided as the publics interest prevailed over P’s right to self determination in these circumstances
what happened in - Robb [1995]
right to refuse treatment and to self determination isn’t diminished by incarceration
what happened in - Re W (2002)
Prisoners with capacity are still entitled to refuse life saving treatment
Can prisoners be forced to have medical treatment
no just because someone is incarcerated doesn’t mean the state can infringe on their right to self determination
what happened in - Re T [1992]
P’s are allowed to refuse treatment on the basis of religious reasons
DE [2019]
Jehova’s witnesses with a learning disability was able to be forced to have a blood transfusion as he did not have capacity
what happened in- Wye Valley v B [2015]
refusing treatment for religious reasons does not infer a lack of capcity
what happened in - RC [2014]
Jehovas witnesses can used AR’s to refuse blood transfusions
AR’s
advanced refusals
can religious beliefs be used to make decisions re medical treatment
yes, physical mental treatment can be refused for any reason and on any basis including religious (Re T 1992) so long as the person has capacity (DE 2019)
refusing medical treatment on the basis of religious belifes cannot be used to infer a lack of capacity (Wye Valley v B 2015)
what was held in - Rochdale Healthcare Trust v C [1997]
a woman in labour due to the ‘pain and emotional distress’ cannot be said to have capacity to make decisions re life saving treatment
what was held in - Re MB (1997)
woman’s right to self determination is not removed in favour for the rights of an unborn child during birth, until the ‘moment of birth’ the child has no seperate interests to the mother
what are a womans rights during birth
although a woman is held not to have capacity during birth (Rochdale v C 1997) her life and best interests are to be preferred over that of the child until the ‘moment of birth’ (Re MB 1997)
What happened in - Re S [1992]
C-section could be performed in the best interests of P without her consent, as her mental health issue prevented her from having capacity
what happened in - Tameside and Glossop v CH [1996]
Woman with scitzophrenia was forced to undergo a C section as treatment for her mental disorder so she could resume taking her medication
can people with mental health disorders be forced into having medical treatment
physical medical treatment can be imposed without P’s consent if their detained under the MHA as treatment for their disorder (Tameside and Glossop v CH 1996) or if their held to lack capacity due to their MH condition
what happened in - Norfolk and Norwich v W [1996]
woman who refused to believe she was pregnant was forced to have a C-section
what happened in - Re CA [2016]
woman with learning disability, autism and genital mutilation was scared to give birth and as such was approved for a C section
what happened in - FG [2014]
for pregnant women with Mh disorders cases that relate to more than transient restrain of P or whats in P’s best interests need advanced planing or to be taken to court
What happened in - R v St George [1998]
woman with a history of mild depression but no pressent symptoms was detained under the MHA and forced to have a C-section without her consent was held not to be justifiable as treatment for her disorder and therefore her capacity and express wishes should not have been undermined
JP [2019]
was held lawful to deceive a woman with a Mental disability into having a C-section in her best interests as she had no capacity
What happened in St George v R [2020]
Woman with sever MH condition was held at the time to have the capacity to make the decision to have a C-section, however if at the time of birth she was held to have lost capacity her prior decision could be over ruled and she could be forced to have a natural birth
MCA 2005
Mental Capacity Act
MHA 1983
Mental Health Act 1983
MHA s63
P’s detained under the MHA can be subject to physical health treatment if its considered treatment for their mental disorder, without P’s consent
MCA s2
(1) P is considered to lack capacity when they have an ‘impairment’ or ‘disturbance’ of the ‘mind or brain’ (2) thats permanent or temporary (3) and theres been consideration for (a) P’s age, (b) their condition and behaviour (4) on Balance.
types of physical treatment that has been approved under MHA as treatment for a mental condition (2 types)
Tube feeding
administering anti-psychotics
Can people under the MHA refuse treatment for religious reasons
yes, unlike for other reasons where the MCA normally overules if a P, even one detained under the MHA or held to have no capacity, can still refuse treatment on grounds of religious reasons (RC 2014)
RC [2014]
cannot force a Jehovah’s witness detained under the MHA to get a blood transfusion even after self harming
what are the requirements under MCA s3 for capacity (4 requirements)
understanding information
retaining information
ability to weigh information, and
ability to communicate a decision
MCS s3(1)
P cannot be said to have capacity under MCA s2 if they cant (a) retain ( 3 even for a short period of time) information (4 including (a) forseeable consequences of the decision and (b) failing to make the decision) (b) understand information (c) weigh up information and (d) communicate (2 conventionally or otherwise) a decision,
what happened in - Kings College v C [2015]
Regardless P had a positive prognosis, she could refuse dialyis as she had capacity since it could not be proven on BOP that She couldn’t understand or weigh relevant information
what happened in - local authority v A [2010]
to be said to have capacity P needs to be held to sufficiently understand contraception but not what its like to bring up a child or if it would be likely to be removed from her care