首页> 外文OA文献 >Best interests in the Mental Capacity Act: time to say goodbye?
【2h】

Best interests in the Mental Capacity Act: time to say goodbye?

机译:《心理能力法案》的最大利益:该说再见了吗?

摘要

Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, as interpreted by the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in General Comment No. 1, offers a vision for law’s response to capacity impairments which differs in crucial ways from that contained in the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The Committee rejects the functional test for capacity and requires that a ‘will and preferences’ paradigm must replace the ‘best interests’ paradigm and that all substitute decision-making regimes must be abolished. This article draws on the position adopted in General Comment No. 1 in evaluating the best interests standard in the Mental Capacity Act. It sets out the normative case for a stronger legislative endorsement of will and preferences and the inclusion of greater support mechanisms but rejects the contention that all substitute decision-making can, or should, be abolished. It also argues that the best interests standard in the Mental Capacity Act retains some revolutionary potential and that, pending legislative reform, this can be further developed through the courts.
机译:残疾人权利委员会在第1号一般性意见中解释的《联合国残疾人权利公约》第12条为法律对能力损害的应对方法提供了远见,这一观点在关键方面与之不同。委员会拒绝对能力进行功能检验,并要求“意愿和偏好”范式必须取代“最大利益”范式,并且必须废除所有替代决策制度,委员会对此表示反对。本文借鉴了第1号一般性意见在评估《心理能力法案》中的最大利益标准时所采取的立场。它提出了在法律上对意愿和偏爱进行更强有力的立法认可,并纳入了更大的支持机制的规范性案例,但拒绝了所有或可以废除所有替代性决策的观点。它还认为,《心理能力法》中的最大利益标准仍然具有一定的革命潜力,在进行立法改革之前,可以通过法院进一步发展这一潜力。

著录项

  • 作者

    Donnelly Mary;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2017
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 en
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号