Display title | SS v London Borough of Richmond upon Thames [2021] EWCOP 31 |
Default sort key | SS v London Borough of Richmond upon Thames (2021) EWCOP 31 |
Page length (in bytes) | 1,128 |
Page ID | 13200 |
Page content language | en - English |
Page content model | wikitext |
Indexing by robots | Allowed |
Number of redirects to this page | 0 |
Edit | Allow only users with "editing" permission (infinite) |
Move | Allow only users with "editing" permission (infinite) |
Page creator | Jonathan (talk | contribs) |
Date of page creation | 14:20, 23 May 2021 |
Latest editor | Jonathan (talk | contribs) |
Date of latest edit | 11:54, 8 October 2021 |
Total number of edits | 5 |
Total number of distinct authors | 1 |
Recent number of edits (within past 90 days) | 0 |
Recent number of distinct authors | 0 |
Description | Content |
Article description: (description ) This attribute controls the content of the description and og:description elements. | (1) SS lacked capacity, owing to dementia, to decide whether to take a coronavirus vaccination, but consistently and volubly opposed it. (2) If she had capacity she should most likely would have refused: previously she had always attended to her medical welfare but resisted vaccinations. (3) It would not be in her best interests to persuade her by lying that her dead father had requested she take the vaccination. (4) It would not be in her best interests to administer it by force (sedation and restraint), as best interests requires evaluating welfare in a sense broader than merely epidemiological: SS would look to the carers to help, and they would not be able to intervene, which likely would dismantle the tentative trust that had been established over the months. |