header-logo header-logo

03 September 2013 / Neil Ward
Categories: Opinion , Human rights , Mental health
printer mail-detail

Protection matters

Non-therapeutic sterilisation makes history

“In my judgment it is overwhelmingly in DE’s best interests to have a vasectomy.” In making this conclusion Mrs Justice Eleanor King DBE brought to an end a lengthy, careful and above all compassionate judgment in which she made legal history by ordering that it was lawful for the Applicant NHS Trust to sterilise a male patient with a learning disability.

The patient, known as “DE”, is a 36-year-old man with an IQ of 40, equivalent to the mental age of a six- to nine-year-old child. He lives with his supportive parents whom the judge rightly praised for their commitment to “work tirelessly to give him the best possible quality of life”. He has a longstanding girlfriend who also has learning disabilities and in 2009 she became pregnant. Tests confirmed DE’s paternity which was a profound shock to the parents and shook the usually harmonious family environment. The parents took him to his GP to ask for a vasectomy to be performed. The GP in turn referred him to the Applicant Trust.

Neutrality

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll