Author:
Two Jessica,Curtice Martin
Abstract
SummaryThis article reviews a 2017 Court of Protection case which assessed and decided issues relating to the Islamic faith and the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The case involved a 39-year-old Muslim man with learning difficulties. It centred on his ability to make decisions about two specific aspects of his faith – capacity for fasting and for the removal of pubic and axillary hair. The judgment describes how s.4 of the Act was applied in deciding these decisions under the doctrine of best interests. In doing so, it elucidates key principles which can be applied to similar cases of this and other faiths.Declaration of interestNone.
Publisher
Royal College of Psychiatrists
Subject
Psychiatry and Mental health
Reference23 articles.
1. Medical ethics: four principles plus attention to scope
2. Wye Valley NHS Trust v B (Rev 1) [2015] EWCOP 60 (28 September 2015).
3. Aintree University Hospitals NHS Trust v James [2013] UKSC 67 (30 October 2013).
4. KC & Anor v City of Westminster Social & Community Services Dept. & Anor [2008] EWCA Civ 198 (19 March 2008).
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献