Rights statement: This is a pre-copy-editing, author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication in Medical Law Review following peer review. The definitive publisher-authenticated version Sara Fovargue, Anticipating Issues with Capacitous Pregnant Women: United Lincolnshire NHS Hospitals Trust v CD [2019] EWCOP 24 and Guys and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust (GSTT) and South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (SLAM) v R [2020] EWCOP 4, Medical Law Review, 28, 4, is available online at: https://academic.oup.com/medlaw/article-abstract/28/4/781/5894048
Accepted author manuscript, 463 KB, PDF document
Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Final published version
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
Anticipating issues with capacitous pregnant women : United Lincolnshire NHS Hospitals Trust V CD [2019] EWCOP 24 And Guys And St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust (GSTT) And South London And Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (Slam) V R [2020] EWCOP 4. / Fovargue, Sara.
In: Medical Law Review, Vol. 28, No. 4, 01.10.2020, p. 781–793.Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Anticipating issues with capacitous pregnant women
T2 - United Lincolnshire NHS Hospitals Trust V CD [2019] EWCOP 24 And Guys And St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust (GSTT) And South London And Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (Slam) V R [2020] EWCOP 4
AU - Fovargue, Sara
N1 - This is a pre-copy-editing, author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication in Medical Law Review following peer review. The definitive publisher-authenticated version Sara Fovargue, Anticipating Issues with Capacitous Pregnant Women: United Lincolnshire NHS Hospitals Trust v CD [2019] EWCOP 24 and Guys and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust (GSTT) and South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (SLAM) v R [2020] EWCOP 4, Medical Law Review, 28, 4, is available online at: https://academic.oup.com/medlaw/article-abstract/28/4/781/5894048
PY - 2020/10/1
Y1 - 2020/10/1
N2 - In United Lincolnshire NHS Hospitals Trust v CD and Guys and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust (GSTT) and South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (SLAM) v R, the Court of Protection was asked to make anticipatory and contingent declarations relating to the obstetric care and mode of delivery for currently capacitous women who were near to their due date but not yet in labour. In this case note I explore the judges’ reasoning on the legal basis for these declarations. In so doing, I consider the wider implications of employing this seemingly new addition to the Court of Protection’s armoury.
AB - In United Lincolnshire NHS Hospitals Trust v CD and Guys and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust (GSTT) and South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (SLAM) v R, the Court of Protection was asked to make anticipatory and contingent declarations relating to the obstetric care and mode of delivery for currently capacitous women who were near to their due date but not yet in labour. In this case note I explore the judges’ reasoning on the legal basis for these declarations. In so doing, I consider the wider implications of employing this seemingly new addition to the Court of Protection’s armoury.
KW - Anticipatory and contingent declarations
KW - autonomy
KW - capacity
KW - consent
KW - Mental Capacity Act 2005
KW - pregnancy
U2 - 10.1093/medlaw/fwaa017
DO - 10.1093/medlaw/fwaa017
M3 - Journal article
VL - 28
SP - 781
EP - 793
JO - Medical Law Review
JF - Medical Law Review
SN - 0967-0742
IS - 4
ER -