Law and medical ethics: Mental incapacity: Some proposals for legislative reform

Journal of Medical Ethics

Volumn 24, Issue 5, 1998, Pages 322-327

  McHale, J V ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Advance directives; Best interests; Clinical research; Law; Mental incapacity; Withdrawal of treatment

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; GOVERNMENT; LAW; LIVING WILL; MEDICAL ETHICS; MENTAL DEFICIENCY; PATIENT RIGHT; ADULT; ADVISORY COMMITTEE; AIREDALE NHS TRUST V. BLAND; DEATH AND EUTHANASIA; DONOR; HOUSE OF LORDS SELECT COMMITTEE ON MEDICAL ETHICS; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; JURISPRUDENCE; LAW COMMISSION (GREAT BRITAIN); LEGAL APPROACH; LEGAL ASPECT; MENTAL CAPACITY; MENTAL HEALTH THERAPIES; MENTAL PATIENT; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; RE C (ADULT: REFUSAL OF TREATMENT); RE F (MENTAL PATIENT: STERILISATION); RE T (ADULT: REFUSAL OF MEDICAL TREATMENT); REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; TRANSPLANTATION; TREATMENT WITHDRAWAL; UNITED KINGDOM; WHO DECIDES? MAKING DECISIONS ON BEHALF OF MENTALLY INCOMPETENT PATIENTS;

AIREDALE NHS TRUST V. BLAND; DEATH AND EUTHANASIA; HOUSE OF LORDS SELECT COMMITTEE ON MEDICAL ETHICS; LAW COMMISSION (GREAT BRITAIN); LEGAL APPROACH; MENTAL HEALTH THERAPIES; RE C (ADULT: REFUSAL OF TREATMENT); RE F (MENTAL PATIENT: STERILISATION); RE T (ADULT: REFUSAL OF MEDICAL TREATMENT); WHO DECIDES? MAKING DECISIONS ON BEHALF OF MENTALLY INCOMPETENT PATIENTS;

ADULT; ADVISORY COMMITTEES; ENGLAND; ETHICS, MEDICAL; HUMANS; JUDICIAL ROLE; MENTAL COMPETENCY; MENTALLY DISABLED PERSONS; NONTHERAPEUTIC HUMAN EXPERIMENTATION; RISK ASSESSMENT; STATE MEDICINE; TISSUE AND ORGAN PROCUREMENT; TISSUE DONORS; WITHHOLDING TREATMENT;

EID: 0031780429     PISSN: 03066800     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jme.24.5.322     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. [1990]1 AC 1.
2. See for example, Airedale NHS Trust v Bland [1993]AC 789; Re W (Mental Patient) [1993]1 FLR 381.
3. See for example, Airedale NHS Trust v Bland [1993]AC 789; Re W (Mental Patient) [1993]1 FLR 381.
4. See for example Mason JK, McCall Smith RA. Law and medical ethics. London: Butterworths, 1994: 362, though see now in relation to the donation of bone marrow, Re Y[1996]2 FLR 791.
5. See for example Mason JK, McCall Smith RA. Law and medical ethics. London: Butterworths, 1994: 362, though see now in relation to the donation of bone marrow, Re Y[1996]2 FLR 791.
6. Law Commission Mental incapacity. Law Com, 231, HMSO 1995.
7. Law Commission. Mentally incapacitated adults and decision making: a new jurisdiction (consultation paper no 128, 1993); Law Commission. Mentally incapacitated adults and decision making: medical treatment and research (consultation paper no 129, 1993); Law Commission. Mentally incapacitated and other vulnerable adults: public law protection (consultation paper no 130, 1993) and see generally the special issue of the Medical Law Review devoted to an examination of the consultation papers which preceded the report. Medical Law Review 1994;2: 1-92.
8. Law Commission. Mentally incapacitated adults and decision making: a new jurisdiction (consultation paper no 128, 1993); Law Commission. Mentally incapacitated adults and decision making: medical treatment and research (consultation paper no 129, 1993); Law Commission. Mentally incapacitated and other vulnerable adults: public law protection (consultation paper no 130, 1993) and see generally the special issue of the Medical Law Review devoted to an examination of the consultation papers which preceded the report. Medical Law Review 1994;2: 1-92.
9. Law Commission. Mentally incapacitated adults and decision making: a new jurisdiction (consultation paper no 128, 1993); Law Commission. Mentally incapacitated adults and decision making: medical treatment and research (consultation paper no 129, 1993); Law Commission. Mentally incapacitated and other vulnerable adults: public law protection (consultation paper no 130, 1993) and see generally the special issue of the Medical Law Review devoted to an examination of the consultation papers which preceded the report. Medical Law Review 1994;2: 1-92.
10. Law Commission. Mentally incapacitated adults and decision making: a new jurisdiction (consultation paper no 128, 1993); Law Commission. Mentally incapacitated adults and decision making: medical treatment and research (consultation paper no 129, 1993); Law Commission. Mentally incapacitated and other vulnerable adults: public law protection (consultation paper no 130, 1993) and see generally the special issue of the Medical Law Review devoted to an examination of the consultation papers which preceded the report. Medical Law Review 1994;2: 1-92.
11. See for example Gunn MJ. Mental incapacity - the Law Commission's report. Child and Family Law Quarterly 1995;7:209-22.
12. Lord Chancellor's Department. Who decides? Making decisions on behalf of mentally incompetent patients. Consultation paper, Dec 1997.
13. See reference 4: paras 3.3-3.13. See generally the discussion in Wilson P. Mental incapacity. Medical Law Review 1996;4: 227 and see reference 6: 211-12.
14. See reference 4: draft bill clause 2(2)b.
15. [1994]1 WLR 290.
16. See reference 7: paras 3.20-3.21.
17. See reference 7: para 3.16.
18. Delaney L. Responsibility and capacity. Health Care Risk Report 7, 1998;4:70.
19. See reference 4: draft bill clauses 3(2).
20. See reference 7: para 3.24.
21. See further Grubb A. Treatment decisions: keeping it within the family. In: Grubb A, ed. Choices and decisions in health care. Chichester: John Wiley, 1993.
22. See reference 4: draft bill clause 4.
23. See reference 7: paras 3.26-3.28.
24. See reference 4: para 4.33.
25. See for example Cruzan v Missouri Department of Health 497 US 261, 110 SCt 2841(1987).
26. [1992]4 All ER 649.
27. House of Lords Select Committee on Medical Ethics. HL paper 21 (1993-4): paras 181-215.
28. British Medical Association. Advance statements about medical treatment: code of practice with explanatory notes. London: BMJ Publishing Group, 1995.
29. See reference 7: para 4.7.
30. See reference 7: para 4.15.
31. See reference 7: paras 4.14-4.15
32. See reference 7: para 4.24.
33. See reference 7: para 4.18.
34. See reference 7: para 4.17.
35. See reference 7: para 4.23.
36. See reference 7: para 4.29.
37. See reference 7: paras 4.26-7.
38. See reference 7: para 4.35-4.37.
39. See reference 1: 10.
40. See reference 4: paras 6.3-6.5
41. See reference 4: para 6.4.
42. See reference 4: paras 6.7-6.11
43. See reference 7: para 5.9.
44. See reference 7: para 5.13.
45. See reference 7: paras 5.19-5.20.
46. See reference 7: paras 5.25.
47. See reference 4: paras 6.22.
48. See reference 7: para 5.30.
49. See Bland at reference 2: see for example Lord Goff.
50. See reference 7: para 5.28.
51. See Andrews K et al. Misdiagnosis of the persistent vegetative state: retrospective study. British Medical Journal 1996:313:13.
52. See reference 7: paras 5.33
53. DIR/JUR (96) 14.
54. See reference 48: article 16.
55. See reference 4: para 6.29.
56. See reference 4: para 6.33.
57. See reference 4:para 6.37.
58. See reference 7: para 5.41.
59. See reference 4: part VII of the report.
60. See reference 22: para 270.
61. See reference 7: para 6.9.
62. See reference 7: para 6.25.
63. See reference 7: para 6.29.
64. See reference 7: para 4.21 and also Re R(a minor) (medical treatment)[1991]4 All ER 177 and Re W(a minor) (medical treatment)[1992]2 All ER 627.
65. See reference 7: para 4.21 and also Re R(a minor) (medical treatment)[1991]4 All ER 177 and Re W(a minor) (medical treatment)[1992]2 All ER 627.
66. See reference 7: para 6.31.
67. See reference 7: para 6.40.
68. See reference 7: para 6.51-2.
69. See reference 7: para 3.40.
70. See reference 7: para 4.30.
71. Bartlett P. The consequences of incapacity. [1997]4 Web JCLI (this is an internet journal thus no page numbers are cited).
72. See reference 4: part x and see reference 7: chs 7 and 9.
73. Stone J. Mental incapacity:reform at last? Solicitors' Journal 1998;142:259.