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

Harneys—Maggie Kwok & George Weston

Harneys—Maggie Kwok & George Weston

Harneys senior leadership appointments

Freeths—Keith Browne & Jim Jordan

Freeths—Keith Browne & Jim Jordan

Freeths strengthens London Construction and Engineering practice with two strategic senior hires

Anthony Collins—Laura Moss

Anthony Collins—Laura Moss

Anthony Collins announces strategic hire to deepen skills base in the social business sector

NEWS
Existing defamation law can respond to AI ‘hallucinations’, but allocating responsibility will prove harder where outputs reach users without human intervention
The High Court has upheld a rare successful serious-irregularity challenge after an arbitrator relied on an implied term neither party had advanced
Thirty years after The Future of Law shook a profession still using fax machines, its central forecast looks increasingly less like prophecy and more like description
Part-time status need only be an effective cause of less favourable treatment, rather than the sole cause, the Supreme Court has held in Augustine v Data Cars
Britain’s new acknowledgement that Israel’s occupation is unlawful, and accompanying settlement-goods ban and sanctions, is significant but overdue, argue Danny Friedman KC and Victor Kattan in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll