Vindicating the right to bodily security of the incapable in research – Part 2
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.19164/ijmhcl.v1i14.186Abstract
The Mental Capacity Act 2005 generally exhibits a stronger ethos of protecting the incapable in intrusive research than the last but one version of the Bill. However, sections 31(5) and 6 of the Act replicate clauses 31(4) and 31(5) of that version. As I noted in Part 1 of this article, these clauses are difficult to reconcile with the primary principle. Here I examine what effect, if any, they will have both on the process of authorising research projects involving intrusive research upon the incapable adult and on the ultimate use of the incapable adult in such research. This will involve analysis of the Act’s provisions in the light of both ordinary rules of statutory interpretation and the interpretative obligation imposed by section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work
