Lindsey, J. (2019) Competing professional knowledge claims about mental capacity in the Court of Protection. Medical Law Review, 28 (1). pp. 1-29. ISSN 0967-0742 doi: 10.1093/medlaw/fwz001
Abstract/Summary
This article analyses the role of evidence in resolving Court of Protection proceedings, drawing on qualitative data obtained from observations of the Court of Protection, a review of Court of Protection case files and interviews with social workers. It is argued that there is a hierarchy of professional evidence in mental capacity law. Psychiatric evidence is at the top of this hierarchy, whereas social work evidence is viewed as a less persuasive form of knowledge about mental capacity. The article argues that this is because mental capacity law views psychiatric evidence as a form of objective and technical expertise about capacity, whereas social work evidence is viewed as a form of subjective, experiential knowledge. In challenging this hierarchy, it is instead argued that mental capacity law should place greater weight on experiential knowledge emanating from a relationship with the subject of the proceedings, rather than elevating the status of psychiatric evidence about mental capacity.
Altmetric Badge
| Item Type | Article |
| URI | https://reading-clone.eprints-hosting.org/id/eprint/111790 |
| Identification Number/DOI | 10.1093/medlaw/fwz001 |
| Refereed | Yes |
| Divisions | No Reading authors. Back catalogue items |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press |
| Download/View statistics | View download statistics for this item |
University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record
Download
Download