Re JS (Disposal of Body) [2016] EWHC 2859 (Fam)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | March 2017 #167

JS, a 14-year-old, terminally ill girl wanted to pursue cryonic preservation: the speculative and controversial scientific theory of freezing a dead body in the hope that resuscitation and a cure may be possible in the distant future. JS’s parents disagreed about what should happen.

JS’s parents were divorced. For most of JS’s life she had lived with her mother (M) and had no face-to-face contact with her father (F), who was also suffering from cancer, since 2008. M and F had a very bad relationship. M supported JS’s wishes.

At the start of proceedin...

Capacity: Open justice?

In the conclusion to a two-part analysis, Debbie Stringer discusses the more paternalistic approach that may be taken by the courts when considering a child’s capacity ‘Doctors and hospitals do not have, nor can they obtain, parental responsibility – it is for the court to determine whether or not treatment, and what sort of treatment, …
This post is only available to members.

Capacity: Maturity test

In the first of a two-part analysis, Debbie Stringer examines how the courts approach Gillick competence in relation to a child’s capacity ‘Where a court has to make a decision where the rights of the child and the rights of the parents conflict, the child’s rights must be the paramount consideration.’ In two recent judgments …
This post is only available to members.

Mental Capacity: Ten years the wiser?

Deborah Smithies and Olivia Checa-Dover discuss the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and concerns as to how it is working in practice ‘If people are presumed to have capacity unless the contrary is demonstrated, when should carers (or other potential decision-makers) be embarking upon an assessment exercise?’ As the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005) approaches …
This post is only available to members.

Children: Children’s voices

Jemma Thomas and Nancy Khawam set out the courts’ approach to children’s wishes and feelings, and the weight to be attached to their views ‘The Convention does not stipulate an age below which a child cannot have attained an age and degree of maturity at which it is appropriate to take account of its views …
This post is only available to members.