HEAL UoS

Posts Tagged ‘law’

Next event: ILRG/HEAL event on The Law’s Response to Alcohol Problems with Jonathan Goodliffe

In 2013, Meetings on May 15, 2013 at 10:57 am

Oops, we’ve had a little hiatus on the blog – apologies, hopefully a more ‘normal’ level of service can now resume …

With that in mind, our next HEAL event is a joint ILRG/HEAL event organised by Johanna Hjalmarsson, of the Insurance Law Research Group at Southampton Law School: The Law’s Response to Alcohol Problems: A discussed led by Jonathan Goodliffe. Jonathan is a practising solicitor who has carried out extensive research in the field of alcohol misuse and how it is addressed within the law and the legal profession. He will give a brief introduction to current scientific approaches to the study and treatment of alcohol problems. He will also discuss how those problems are dealt with (or as the case may be not dealt with) within various legal fields such as crime, employment, childcare, professional discipline, and insurance.

This event will run from 2pm in the Law School (4/2055) on Wednesday 29 May 2013.
Please let us know you are coming:jhj@soton.ac.uk

Advertisements

This week’s meeting!

In 2011, Capacity, Meetings, Mental Health on September 26, 2011 at 8:45 am

On Wednesday 28 September, we’re meeting at 4pm in room 2007/4 (Law, Highfield) to discuss the ‘Adults With Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000 – Consultation On Certification Of Incapacity For Medical Treatment, with a view to formulating and submitting a response on behalf of HEAL.

This consultation seeks views on four issues on Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000 Part 5 in relation to medical treatment. The issues are:  1.widening the range of institutions which can offer training; 2.whether dentists should be required to undertake training for this purpose; 3.whether multiple section 47 medical treatment certificates should be required in some circumstances; 4.and whether other medical practitioners not specified should be enabled to certify incapacity for medical treatment.

Case of the week: September 22, 2000

In Case of the week, Cases 2000, Death and dying on September 19, 2011 at 8:46 am

Re A (Children) EWCA Civ, Sept 22, 2000.  

The twins, named Jodie and Mary in the reports in order to preserve their anonymity, were born on August 8, 2000 in Manchester, after their parents travelled to the UK from Gozo, Malta (as it was known they were expecting conjoined twins and local resources were limited). They were joined at the lower abdomen/pelvis and – crucially – shared an aorta. Whilst Jodie was reported to have an ‘anatomically normal brain, heart, lungs and liver’, showing normal reactions to stimuli etc [para 6, CA transcript, below], Mary was reported to have a ‘primitive brain’, poorly functioning heart, and an absence of ‘functioning lung tissue’ [at 7], and was therefore dependent on Jodie for survival. The surgical team and hospital were in favour of surgical separation in order to maximise the chances of Jodie’s survival; the pressure placed on her heart in supporting both her and Mary was, according to expert evidence, highly likely to lead to the premature deaths of both children, whereas separation might enable Jodie to survive, albeit it that it would concurrently lead to Mary’s immediate death.

The parents disagreed, noting the influence of their devout religious faith (Roman Catholic) that it should be ‘God’s will’ to decide whether or not either or both of the children should survive. The hospital sought, and was granted, a declaration that the operation might go ahead – it was granted by Johnson J on 25 August 2000. The parents’ appeal was, a month later, dismissed by a unanimous Court of Appeal panel, comprised of Ward LJ, Brooke LJ and Robert Walker LJ. Unsurprisingly this case raised a plethora of legal and ethical/moral dilemmas for the court including – but not exhaustively – the role of parents in decision-making; questions over comparative ‘quality of life’ issues; welfare/best interests; murder, intention & the doctrine of necessity (in defence); role of religion; relevant aspects and intersections of Family Law and Criminal Law; & the sanctity of life (including some comments on the (then) forthcoming Human Rights Act 1998. However, the unanimity of the agreed outcome masks the divergent routes by which the individual judges arrived at their decisions.

For those who wish to read further, the case transcript is freely available to all via  BAILII:  http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2000/254.html. Permission to appeal to the House of Lords was granted, but the parents chose not to appeal – nor was a direct application to Strasbourg (ie an alternative route to challenge the decision) undertaken.

Links

Coverage of the CA decision: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/937586.stm  

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2000/sep/28/4?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

Coverage of reactions to the decision: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/937377.stm

This decision is also reported at [2001] Fam 147, [2000] 4 All ER 961, [2001] 2 WLR 480, [2000] 3 FCR 577, [2001] 1 FLR 1, [2001] Fam Law 18, 57 BMLR 1; but access to these resources may be restricted (subscription required).

Storage problems? Legal principles on the storage of human tissue

In 2011, Human tissue on September 14, 2011 at 7:00 am

One of our HEAL UoS colleagues, Dr Remi Nwabueze, spoke last Friday, 9 September, at the inaugural symposium on ‘Legal principles underlying the law on storage of human tissue’, a two-year Oxford-Melbourne Research Partnership set up to explore how the storage and use of human body parts and tissue should be regulated. Remi’s paper was entitled: ‘Philosophical perspectives on the concept of property and its applicability to human tissue’, and builds on some of his earlier work in this field, including his monograph on Biotechnology and the Challenge of Property.

Welcome to the HEAL UoS blog!

In Welcome on September 1, 2011 at 3:00 am

As it says in the ‘About‘ section, HEAL UoS ~ the Health Ethics and Law research group at the University of Southampton ~ was established in 2005 through the efforts of Prof. Jonathan Montgomery and Dr. Caroline Jones. We were delighted to have Prof. Hazel Biggs join us in 2009. Together the three of us run the network, arranging lunchtime seminars on topical subjects & occasional workshops, and liaising with colleagues and peers to discuss and coordinate responses to public consultations in the field of Health Care Ethics and Law, broadly conceived. We try to both foster and further develop collaborative relationships across the University and local NHS community.

This blog …

Our aim is to update this blog at least once weekly with posts under the historical ‘case of the week’ section (going on the dates of judgments – so we can’t promise a case every week!), policy developments and ‘in the news’ stories, both current and historical, and ‘events’ to keep you up-to-date with HEAL UoS’s activities. You can also follow us on Twitter:  @HEALUoS

nb. This blog does not contain legal advice, nor does it seek to provide such guidance – if you need legal advice and assistance please contact a qualified solicitor, and/or your union (if relevant) or local CAB office.