Making decisions : the Government's proposals for making decisions on behalf of mentally incapacitated adults : a report issued in the light of responses to the consultation paper Who decides? / presented to Parliament by the Lord High Chancellor by Command of Her Majesty, October 1999.

  • Great Britain. Lord Chancellor's Department.
Date:
1999
Catalogue details

Licence: Open Government Licence

Credit: Making decisions : the Government's proposals for making decisions on behalf of mentally incapacitated adults : a report issued in the light of responses to the consultation paper Who decides? / presented to Parliament by the Lord High Chancellor by Command of Her Majesty, October 1999. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    7/40 (page 3)
    The court’s powers will include the appointment of a manager where ongoing decisions are necessary, and where a person is incapable of managing his or her own financial affairs, the manager will also be able to deal with personal welfare or healthcare issues. Who Decides? set out a framework for a modern Court of Protection replacing the existing Court of Protection. The court would be able to resolve disputes where there were doubts about a person’s capacity. It could also resolve disputes about CPAs, the best interests of a person without capacity or whether a general authority was being used inappropriately. The Government has decided, in the light of the responses to the consultation, that anumber of issues raised in Who Decides? should not be taken forward at this time. These issues are: | e Advance Statements about Healthcare ¢ Independent Supervision of Medical and Research Procedures ¢ Public Law Protection for People at Risk ADVANCE STATEMENTS In Who Decides?, the Government sought views on whether there should be legislation on the subject of advance statements about healthcare and, if so, what its objective should be. Advance statements (someti mes known as apeeteres or living wills) are anticipatory decisions made while a person is capable, which are intended to give effect to that person’s wishes as to how he or she shall be treated or cared for after the loss of capacity. The responses to consultation showed a wide range of views on this complex and sensitive subject. Some respondents believed that legislation was needed to clarify the law, and that the exis ting case law was not adequately understood by doctors and lawyers. Some believed that the existing case law provided sufficient guidance, and that the development of the common law would provide aera flexibility than rigid statutory provisions. Others believed that _ advance ‘statements \ were morally wrong, and that giving them legislative force would compel doctors to withdraw or withhold treatment that could save the patient’s life. Concerns were also expressed that doctors would be prevented from providing the best treatment available or using new treatments that may have developed since the patient had made the advance statement. The Government recognises the strength of feeling on this subject and the fact that widely differing views are held with sincerity and conviction.