header-logo header-logo

20 January 2023 / Laura Davidson
Issue: 8009 / Categories: Features , Court of Protection , Mental health
printer mail-detail

Cloak & dagger in the Court of Protection? (Pt 2)

107045
Is it time for the shadowy practice of covert medication to be brought into the light? Dr Laura Davidson thinks so
  • The hearing following disclosure of the surreptitious medication duplicity in Re A (Covert Medication: Closed Proceedings).
  • The decision’s lawfulness in excluding from the hearings the mother of the young woman at the centre of the case.
  • The practice of covert medication and the lack of legal safeguards surrounding its use.

I recently provided a detailed history of Re A (Covert Medication: Closed Proceedings) [2022] EWCOP 44 (See Pt 1, 172 NLJ 8005, pp9-10). Here, I cover the hearing following disclosure of the surreptitious medication duplicity, reflect on the decision’s lawfulness in excluding B, the mother of the young woman at the centre of this case, from hearings, and discuss the practice of covert medication itself.

Background

Initially, a brief outline is provided for those coming to the case anew.

A, who had mild learning disability and Asperger’s

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll