Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Three notorious Court of Protection hearings

 

Jerome Taylor
Wednesday 30 January 2013 12:23 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

After doctors today told the High Court that an Iranian immigrant on hunger strike must be force fed because a 'delusional disorder' renders him incapable of a decision on starvation, we look back at three other notorious Court of Protection hearings.

Deprivation of Liberty

The most publicly known case in the Court of Protection involved Steven Neary, a young man with autism and learning difficulties who was illegally deprived of his liberty by Hillingdon Borough Council when he was forcibly taken into care. Steven's father Mark fought tirelessly against council officials and eventually won his case. The judge was scathing of Hillingdon's actions and said a “lesser man” than Mark Neary might never have got his son back.

Abortion request for a young mother

Earlier this month the Court of Protection was asked to decide whether a young pregnant woman with sickle cell anaemia and impaired mental faculties should be allowed to keep her child. In a case that illustrated the often grey nature of capacity, the judge ruled that while the woman lacked the ability to litigate - and might indeed have trouble bringing up her child - she nonetheless had enough capacity to decide that she wanted to press ahead with her pregnancy.

Capacity to consent to sex

In an example of how capacity can be both lost and won, a gay man known only as “Alan” (not his real name) with severe learning difficulties was forbidden by a judge from having anal sex because he lacked the capacity to understand consensual, safe sexual relationships. The judge, however, recognised that Alan might one day be able to make safe decision about sex if he was given enough education by his local authority.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in