Medical Law Review最新文献

There is concern that the recent increase in demonstrations outside abortion clinics in England and Wales may have a detrimental impact on clinic-users' access to abortion services. Parliament could respond to this concern by passing legislation that implements fixed buffer zones around all clinics providing abortion services in England and Wales. This would make it an offence to engage in prohibited behaviour (as defined by the legislation) within a specified area around abortion clinics. Such legislation may be challenged, however, on the basis that it interferes with the rights afforded to demonstrators by Articles 9, 10, and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). This article examines the proportionality of fixed buffer zone legislation, which has not yet been considered by the European Court of Human Rights nor the UK Supreme Court. Two relationships are considered: first, the relationship between the aims of the measures and the means to achieve those aims; second, the relationship between the competing interests of demonstrators opposing abortion and clinic-users seeking an abortion. This article shows that fixed buffer zone legislation can be proportionate. Consequently, the ECHR is no impediment to the enactment of fixed buffer zone legislation in England and Wales.

Medical treatment for adolescents with gender dysphoria has attracted considerable attention in recent years, with continuing court involvement in Australia and recent judicial review proceedings in the UK. In Re Imogen [No 6], the Family Court of Australia held that an application to the Family Court is mandatory if a parent or a medical practitioner of an adolescent diagnosed with gender dysphoria disputes the diagnosis, the adolescent's capacity to consent, or the proposed treatment. In this article, we examine the Family Court's rationale for preserving its welfare jurisdiction in gender dysphoria cases. We analyse case law developments in Australia and more recently in the UK and identify a thread of judicial discomfort in gender dysphoria jurisprudence about adolescents consenting to medical treatment that the court perceives to be 'innovative', 'experimental', 'unique', or 'controversial'. We explore whether treatment for gender dysphoria can be characterised as 'innovative' and identify four factors that appear to be influencing courts in Australia and the UK. We also consider how such a characterisation might impact (if at all) on an adolescent's capacity to consent to gender dysphoria treatment. We critique the ongoing role of courts in these cases and recommend a robust decision-making framework for gender dysphoria treatment to minimise court involvement in the future.

This article examines the pressing global problem of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), applying motivational posture theory to demonstrate how AMR and the prescribing that drives it can be considered a regulatory challenge. Following an outline of AMR and the threat of the 'superbugs' to which it gives rise, the article assesses the regulatory nature of the 'prescribing encounter' in the primary care setting. It applies both a responsive regulatory lens and motivational posture theory to analyse over 100 narrative accounts of encounters between a general practitioner and a patient. In so doing, the article examines the discursive repertoires and cultural resources available to primary care patients to explain the prescribing encounter and the dynamics within it. It concludes that patients conceive of prescribers as regulatory authorities and prescribing itself as a regulatory encounter. On this basis, the article argues that applying responsive regulatory theory and practice in response to the AMR challenge is likely to find reasonable patient acceptance, offering a new approach to this currently intractable challenge. This article then offers an analysis of what factors indicate patient drift towards defiance of regulatory aims, and what engagement and support encourage a return to cooperation.