Commentary on Charles Foster’s ‘The rebirth of medical paternalism: an NHS Trust v Y’

Journal of Medical Ethics 45 (1):8-9 (2019)

Abstract
Professor Charles Foster1 argues that the recent decision by the Supreme Court2 on the process of making decisions about medical treatment in people who lack capacity due to a prolonged disorder of consciousness is fostering medical paternalism. He considers that the judgment shows ‘ deference to the guidelines of various organisations ’ and then that ‘ The guidance has effectively become a definitive statement of the relevant obligations,’ concluding that ‘ This usurps the function of the law.’ Healthcare teams make all decisions concerning medical care provided; no-one else can. Both the clinicians themselves, and any guidance provided to them, must comply with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.3 Lady Black’s judgment makes clear that ‘ The basic protective structure is established by the MCA 2005 ’ and that the associated Code of Practice4 ‘ contains valuable guidance ’. She specifically highlights that the decision-maker must ensure that ‘ account has been taken of the patient’s previously expressed wishes and those of people close to him, as well as the opinions of other medical personnel. The MCA 2005 requires this to happen, and is reinforced by the professional guidance available to doctors.’ The Act says: ‘ He must consider, so far as is reasonably ascertainable— 1. the person’s past and present wishes and feelings (and, in …
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1136/medethics-2018-105200
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 47,182
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Rebirth of Medical Paternalism: An NHS Trust V Y.Charles Foster - 2019 - Journal of Medical Ethics 45 (1):3-7.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Grounded Ethical Analysis.John McMillan - 2019 - Journal of Medical Ethics 45 (1):1-2.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Rebirth of Medical Paternalism: An NHS Trust V Y.Charles Foster - 2019 - Journal of Medical Ethics 45 (1):3-7.
A Trust-Based Argument Against Paternalism.Simon R. Clarke - 2013 - In Pekka Makela & Cynthia Townley (eds.), Trust: Analytic and Applied Persectives. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Rodopi. pp. 53-75.
Medical Paternalism in House M.D.M. R. Wicclair - 2008 - Medical Humanities 34 (2):93-99.
Refusal Rights, Law, and Medical Paternalism in Turkey.Jessica Flanigan - 2013 - Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (10):636-637.
The Limits of Medical Paternalism.Paula Boddington & Heta Hayry - 1993 - Philosophical Quarterly 43 (171):263.
Mandatory Disclosure and Medical Paternalism.Emma C. Bullock - 2016 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 19 (2):409-424.
Using Informed Consent to Save Trust.Nir Eyal - 2014 - Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (7):437-444.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2018-11-01

Total views
24 ( #394,223 of 2,289,504 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
9 ( #100,405 of 2,289,504 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature