Revision as of 00:16, 6 December 2019 by Jonathan (New Jones)
Mental Health Law Online
The internet resource on mental health law, and mental capacity law, for England & Wales. You can read a review of the site here.
Stay up to date
- 27/02/20: Case (Dental treatment - delay). Cardiff and Vale University Health Board v P  EWCOP 8 — "It might seem, from the above account, that some dental assessment was required quickly and now as long ago as November or early December 2019. Plainly, it was. But the application was only made by the Health Board on 20th February 2020. The proposed inspection and/or treatment is not to take place until early March. For anybody who has had toothache, even delay between now and then looks like an eternity. But this young man, it seems, has been suffering, and significantly so, for nearly five months. This is little short of an outrage. It is indefensible. ... An additional complication arose in November when P was taken to the local A&E by his parents with an obvious bruise to his forehead. They believed that his behaviour was so markedly changed that they feared he had some sort of concussion and may have fractured his skull. It is, to my mind, self-evident that there was an urgent medical emergency that should have been investigated within hours or days, but in fact there has, as yet, been no CT scan at all. ... It is, sadly, yet again, a situation in which there has been a fundamental failure to communicate effectively by those responsible for P's care. This message has now been the conclusion of so many reviews, including serious case reviews, that it has become almost trite. There is no point identifying lessons to be learned if they are not, in fact, learned."
- 25/02/20: Case (Abortion). Re AB (Termination of Pregnancy)  EWCA Civ 1215 — "The requirement is for the court to consider both wishes and feelings. The judge placed emphasis on the fact that AB's wishes were not clear and were not clearly expressed. She was entitled to do that but the fact remains that AB's feelings were, as for any person, learning disabled or not, uniquely her own and are not open to the same critique based upon cognitive or expressive ability. AB's feelings were important and should have been factored into the balancing exercise alongside consideration of her wishes. ... [I]n my judgement, she clearly gave inadequate weight to the non-medical factors in the case, while the views expressed by the doctors were necessarily significantly predicated upon imponderables. In the end, the evidence taken as a whole was simply not sufficient to justify the profound invasion of AB's rights represented by the non-consensual termination of this advanced pregnancy."
- 25/02/20: Case (Abortion). An NHS Foundation Trust v AB  EWCOP 26 — "This is an application by the NHS Trust for an order in respect of a 24 year old woman AB who is 22 weeks pregnant and, who the Trust say lacks capacity and in whose best interests it is said to have a termination of pregnancy. ... I would like to record my unhappiness about the lateness of this application. AB is now estimated to be 22 weeks pregnant and therefore the cut-off date under the Abortion Act 1967 of 24 weeks is imminent. ... I am acutely conscious of the fact that for the state to order someone to have a termination, where it appears that they do not want it, is immensely intrusive and certainly interferes with her Article 8 rights. ... In my view the balance in terms of AB's best interests lies in her having the termination."
- 22/02/20: Case (Vulnerable witnesses). Re C (Female Genital Mutilation and Forced Marriage: Fact Finding)  EWHC 3449 (Fam) — Paragraphs 14-18 deal with "Assessing the Evidence of Vulnerable Witnesses", including the following: "Despite my very considerable sympathy for witnesses with significant vulnerabilities such as the mother in this case, my clear view is that there is one standard of proof which applies without modification irrespective of the characteristics of witnesses, including vulnerable witnesses to whom Part 3A and PD3AA apply. I observe that many vulnerable witnesses are just as likely as anyone else either to tell the truth or to lie deliberately or misunderstand events. It would be unfair and discriminatory to discount a witness's evidence because of their inherent vulnerabilities (including mental and cognitive disabilities) and it would be equally wrong in principle not to apply a rigorous analysis to a witness's evidence merely because they suffer from mental, cognitive or emotional difficulties. To do otherwise would, in effect, attenuate the standard of proof when applied to witnesses of fact with such vulnerabilities. ... Having said that, I offer the following observations, none of them particularly novel, which might assist in assessing the evidence of vulnerable witnesses, particularly those with learning disabilities. First, it is simplistic to conclude that the evidence of such a witness is inherently unreliable. Second, it is probably unfair to expect the same degree of verbal fluency and articulacy which one might expect in a witness without those problems. Third, it is important not to evaluate the evidence of such a witness on the basis of intuition which may or may not be unconsciously biased. Finally, it is important to take into account and make appropriate allowances for that witness's disability or vulnerability, assisted by any expert or other evidence available."
- No current job adverts
Online CPD scheme providing 12 hours for £60: suitable for solicitors, barristers, psychiatrists, social workers and psychiatric nurses
The Magic Book is a database of contact details - please contribute to it (the process is quick and simple).
- Edge Training: Annual DOLS and LPS Conference (London, 2/3/20)
- PELT: Becoming a Mental Health Act Administrator - The basics (Hoylake, 10/3/20)
- PELT: Advanced course for Mental Health Act Administrators (Hoylake, 11/3/20)
- Edge Training: Liberty Protection Safeguards (Manchester, 20/3/20)
- Edge Training: Level 3 Safeguarding Adults (London, 20/3/20)
- Edge Training: Unconscious Bias (London, 23/3/20)
- MHLA: Restricted Cases (Leeds, 27/3/20)
- MHLA: Foundation course (Manchester, 1/4/20)
- PELT: Introduction to the Mental Health Act (Hoylake, 2/4/20)
- PELT: Accredited - Admission to the MHT Panel (Hoylake, 7/4/20 and 8/4/20)
- MHLA: Panel Course (Leeds, 16/4/20 and 17/4/20)
- Edge Training: Liberty Protection Safeguards (London, 20/4/20)
- Edge Training: BIA Legal Update - Annual Refresher (London, 24/4/20)
- MHLA: Legal Aid Supervision (Birmingham, 24/4/20)
- Edge Training: DOLS Mental Health Assessors Annual Refresher Course (London, 27/4/20)
- MHLA: Panel Course (London, 27/4/20 and 28/4/20)
- PELT: Introduction to MCA and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (Hoylake, 30/4/20)
- Edge Training: Sexual relations, contraception, marriage and restricting contact (London, 1/5/20)
- Edge Training: Hoarding and the Law (London, 1/5/20)
- Edge Training: Self Neglect and the Mental Capacity Act (London, 4/5/20)
- MHLA: Introduction to the Court of Protection (London, 6/5/20)
- Edge Training: AMHP Legal Update (London, 11/5/20)
- MHLA: Legal Aid and Peer Review (London, 13/5/20)
- Edge Training: Liberty Protection Safeguards (Manchester, 15/5/20)
- MHLA: Advocacy, Risk and Cross-Examination Masterclass (London, 18/5/20)
- PELT: Depriving Children and Young People of their liberty lawfully (Hoylake, 20/5/20)
- MHLA: Restricted Cases (London, 4/6/20)
- PELT: Introduction to using Court of Protection including s21A Appeals (Hoylake, 9/6/20)
- PELT: Court of Protection/MCA Masterclass - Legal Update (Hoylake, 2/7/20)
- Edge Training: Sexual relations, contraception, marriage and restricting contact (Manchester, 3/7/20)
- PELT: Mental Health Act Masterclass - Legal Update (Hoylake, 4/7/20)
- Thalamos: Getting Started in Independent Practice - Best Practice for Psychiatrists (London, 11/9/20)
- Edge Training: Liberty Protection Safeguards (Manchester, 25/9/20)
- Edge Training: Transforming Care (Manchester, 6/11/20)
We benefit when you buy fromhaving come from this website