header-logo header-logo

29 July 2010 / Jonathan Herring
Issue: 7428 / Categories: Features , Family , Mental health
printer mail-detail

The right to choose

Contraception, mental capacity & state intervention. Jonathan Herring reports

When does someone have capacity to consent to receive, or not to receive, contraception? When is it in someone’s best interests to be given contraception? These were the key questions at the heart of a fascinating decision: A Local Authority v Mrs A and Mr A [2010] EWHC 1549 (Fam).

The facts

Mrs A was aged 29. According to the evidence before the court she had an extremely low level of intellectual functioning. She had previously had two children removed from her at birth because there were real concerns that she would not be able to provide adequate care for them. In 2006 she had married Mr A. He too had a learning difficulty and a significant impairment of intellectual functioning. Before her marriage Mrs A had been receiving daily support from the local authority’s community living team. The team had been arranging for her to receive contraception by means of a monthly depot injection, to which she consented. Since her marriage

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

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll