A critical case commentary on Avon and Wiltshire Mental Health Partnership and North Bristol NHS Trust v WA and DT: Did the judge reach a fair and just decision regarding the capacity and best interest of the person?

Authors

  • Lisa Kachina Poku Lawyer, United Kingdom.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.52609/jmlph.v4i1.110

Keywords:

Autonomy, Equality, Self-determination, Vulnerability

Abstract

Avon and Wiltshire Mental Health Partnership and North Bristol NHS Trust v WA and DT [2020] EWCOP, [2020] 7 WLUK 271: This case critically evaluates the findings on WA’s capacity assessment and best interest decision made by the courts to determine the treatment plan. From the finding’s on WA’s capacity, it is apparent that the way capacity testing was dealt with was not in accordance with the MCA guiding principles, but rather based on a subjective view of the assessors. Consequently, WA was held to be incapacitated requiring the courts to look at the best interest provisions under section 4 of the MCA in discussing the proposed treatment options. The positive aspect to this case was that Hayden J gave greater weight to WA’s wishes and feelings, and affirmed his autonomy.

Downloads

Published

2024-01-12

How to Cite

Poku, L. K. (2024). A critical case commentary on Avon and Wiltshire Mental Health Partnership and North Bristol NHS Trust v WA and DT: Did the judge reach a fair and just decision regarding the capacity and best interest of the person?. The Journal of Medicine, Law & Public Health, 4(1), 317–326. https://doi.org/10.52609/jmlph.v4i1.110

Issue

Section

Commentary