从立法意图到临终关怀实践:探讨2005年《精神能力法》的谱系

C. Redhead
{"title":"从立法意图到临终关怀实践:探讨2005年《精神能力法》的谱系","authors":"C. Redhead","doi":"10.19164/jlrm.v2i1.1284","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) regulates decision-making for people without capacity. Post-legislative scrutiny of the Act in 2014 by a House of Lords Select Committee concluded that the MCA was neither well understood nor working well in practice. The aim of the research discussed in this article was to consider how the Act’s principles are understood and interpreted in hospice practice, specifically considering the patient’s role in the decision-making process. \nThe research proceeded through four distinct, but linked, phases which, together, offered a ‘life story’ of the MCA from legislative intent to current hospice practice (in 2019). The research was informed by relational theory and legal consciousness theory and the methods described are underpinned by a narrative approach to analysis. Phase one was an innovative genealogical analysis of policy and legislative documents (n=24) influencing the ‘coming to be’ of the MCA. In phase two, a systematic review of Court of Protection judgments (n=63) ‘historicises’ the empirical research, which was the focus of phases three and four (group interviews and individual interviews, respectively). Staff from two participating hospices participated in two group interviews and six individual interviews (13 participants), providing empirical data. Template analysis was used in all four phases of the study, and adapted to facilitate a synthesis of the findings across the study as a whole.","PeriodicalId":212730,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Research Methodology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From Legislative Intent to Hospice Practice: Exploring the Genealogy of The Mental Capacity Act 2005\",\"authors\":\"C. Redhead\",\"doi\":\"10.19164/jlrm.v2i1.1284\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) regulates decision-making for people without capacity. Post-legislative scrutiny of the Act in 2014 by a House of Lords Select Committee concluded that the MCA was neither well understood nor working well in practice. The aim of the research discussed in this article was to consider how the Act’s principles are understood and interpreted in hospice practice, specifically considering the patient’s role in the decision-making process. \\nThe research proceeded through four distinct, but linked, phases which, together, offered a ‘life story’ of the MCA from legislative intent to current hospice practice (in 2019). The research was informed by relational theory and legal consciousness theory and the methods described are underpinned by a narrative approach to analysis. Phase one was an innovative genealogical analysis of policy and legislative documents (n=24) influencing the ‘coming to be’ of the MCA. In phase two, a systematic review of Court of Protection judgments (n=63) ‘historicises’ the empirical research, which was the focus of phases three and four (group interviews and individual interviews, respectively). Staff from two participating hospices participated in two group interviews and six individual interviews (13 participants), providing empirical data. Template analysis was used in all four phases of the study, and adapted to facilitate a synthesis of the findings across the study as a whole.\",\"PeriodicalId\":212730,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Legal Research Methodology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Legal Research Methodology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.19164/jlrm.v2i1.1284\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Legal Research Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19164/jlrm.v2i1.1284","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

《2005年精神能力法》(MCA)规范了无能力人的决策。2014年,上议院特别委员会对该法案进行了立法后的审查,得出的结论是,《MCA》既没有得到很好的理解,也没有在实践中发挥良好作用。本文讨论的研究目的是考虑如何在临终关怀实践中理解和解释该法案的原则,特别是考虑患者在决策过程中的角色。研究进行了四个不同但相互关联的阶段,这些阶段共同提供了MCA从立法意图到当前临终关怀实践的“生活故事”(2019年)。该研究以关系理论和法律意识理论为依据,所描述的方法以叙事分析方法为基础。第一阶段是对影响民政部“形成”的政策和立法文件(n=24)进行创新性的家谱分析。在第二阶段,对保护法院判决(n=63)的系统回顾将实证研究“历史化”,这是第三和第四阶段(分别为小组访谈和个人访谈)的重点。两家参与研究的临终关怀医院的工作人员参与了2次团体访谈和6次个人访谈(13名参与者),提供了实证数据。在研究的所有四个阶段都使用了模板分析,并进行了调整,以促进整个研究结果的综合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
From Legislative Intent to Hospice Practice: Exploring the Genealogy of The Mental Capacity Act 2005
The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) regulates decision-making for people without capacity. Post-legislative scrutiny of the Act in 2014 by a House of Lords Select Committee concluded that the MCA was neither well understood nor working well in practice. The aim of the research discussed in this article was to consider how the Act’s principles are understood and interpreted in hospice practice, specifically considering the patient’s role in the decision-making process. The research proceeded through four distinct, but linked, phases which, together, offered a ‘life story’ of the MCA from legislative intent to current hospice practice (in 2019). The research was informed by relational theory and legal consciousness theory and the methods described are underpinned by a narrative approach to analysis. Phase one was an innovative genealogical analysis of policy and legislative documents (n=24) influencing the ‘coming to be’ of the MCA. In phase two, a systematic review of Court of Protection judgments (n=63) ‘historicises’ the empirical research, which was the focus of phases three and four (group interviews and individual interviews, respectively). Staff from two participating hospices participated in two group interviews and six individual interviews (13 participants), providing empirical data. Template analysis was used in all four phases of the study, and adapted to facilitate a synthesis of the findings across the study as a whole.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Can ethnic disparities in sentencing be taken as evidence of judicial discrimination? An Insider Within Positionality, Gender and Reflexivity in Outsider-Insider Research Can ethnic disparities in sentencing be taken as evidence of judicial discrimination? An Insider Within
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1