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

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers drives further growth in its UK immigration team with new partner Sophie Barrett-Brown

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal invests in next generation of legal talent as specialist litigation practice grows

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips continues momentum in London with arrival of Catrina Smith

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll