We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
In the UK, decisions taken on behalf of patients who lack capacity must be in their best interests, but the meaning of ‘best interests’ has evolved. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 codified the law relating to adults who lack capacity, offering a checklist of factors relevant to best interests assessment, including the person’s ‘past and present wishes and feelings’ and the ‘beliefs and values that would be likely to influence’ their decisions. Since 2013, the courts have gone further and, in some circumstances, seem to treat the patient’s wishes as the decisive factor. Now, a gap exists between what the statute says and its judicial interpretation. Doctors seeking guidance on how to weigh the patient’s own wishes when making a best interests decision will receive divergent advice from the legislation, guidance from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), and the law reports. This chapter suggests this discrepancy is unnecessarily confusing for health care professionals, patients and their families. If there is, or should be, a rebuttable presumption in favour of making the patient’s wishes decisive, the law would preferably state this clearly and unequivocally.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.