Critical Judgment Projects: Medical Law
This project imagines a world where decisions by judges must be ethically as well as legally valid. It examines nine cases in the health/medical sphere and re-writes them with robust ethical theory in mind. Each judgment is accompanied by an ethical and legal commentary that explore the implications of the particular approach and provide a critique of the various issues arising in each case. The judgments have been published in a collection edited by Stephen W Smith, John Coggon, Clark Hobson, Richard Huxtable, Sheelagh McGuinness, José Miola, Mary Neal, Ethical Judgments: Re-Writing Medical Law (Hart Publishing, 2017)
Available Extracts:
Jackie Leach Scully, ‘Re: A (conjoined twins): An ethical commentary’ (pre-published version of chapter)
Richard Huxtable, ‘Re: A (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation’ (pre-published version of chapter)
Sheelagh McGuinness, ‘Legal Commentary: St George's Healthcare NHS Trust v S; R v Collins and others, ex parte S [1998] 3 All ER 673’ (pre-published version of chapter)
Richard Huxtable, ‘R (on the application of Nicklinson and another) v Ministry of Justice’ (pre-published version of chapter)
Stephen Smith, ‘Ethical judgment 1, Airedale NHS Trust v Bland’ (pre-published version of chapter)
Stephen Smith, ‘Nicklinson and the ethics of the legal system’ (pre-published version of chapter)
Reviews:
Alex RK, ‘Book Review: “Ethical Judgments – Re-Writing Medical Law”’ on Mental Capacity Law and Policy (1 May 2017)