精神能力法的两种生命：在比较分析中重新思考东西方的二元对立。

IF 1.8 4区医学 Q1 LAW

Medical Law Review Pub Date : 2024-09-25 DOI:10.1093/medlaw/fwae034

Hillary Chua, Camillia Kong, Michael Dunn

{"title":"精神能力法的两种生命：在比较分析中重新思考东西方的二元对立。","authors":"Hillary Chua, Camillia Kong, Michael Dunn","doi":"10.1093/medlaw/fwae034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Mental Capacity Act 2005 in England and Wales and Singapore's Mental Capacity Act 2008 (which substantially transplants provisions from the former statute) might appear to be twins on paper, but they have gone on to lead very different lives. In this article, we examine how two broadly identical laws have taken on divergent identities within their respective jurisdictions when implemented and interpreted in the courtroom. We reveal and analyse differences in parliamentary intent concerning at what stage a person's decision-making agency is putatively empowered; judicial development of central concepts; underlying socio-cultural commitments; and outline opportunities for bi-directional learning in mental capacity law across both jurisdictions.","PeriodicalId":49146,"journal":{"name":"Medical Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The two lives of the Mental Capacity Act: rethinking East-west binaries in comparative analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Hillary Chua, Camillia Kong, Michael Dunn\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/medlaw/fwae034\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Mental Capacity Act 2005 in England and Wales and Singapore's Mental Capacity Act 2008 (which substantially transplants provisions from the former statute) might appear to be twins on paper, but they have gone on to lead very different lives. In this article, we examine how two broadly identical laws have taken on divergent identities within their respective jurisdictions when implemented and interpreted in the courtroom. We reveal and analyse differences in parliamentary intent concerning at what stage a person's decision-making agency is putatively empowered; judicial development of central concepts; underlying socio-cultural commitments; and outline opportunities for bi-directional learning in mental capacity law across both jurisdictions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":49146,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Law Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwae034\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwae034","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

英格兰和威尔士的《2005 年心智能力法》与新加坡的《2008 年心智能力法》（该法大量移植了前者的条款）在纸面上看似孪生兄弟，但它们的命运却大相径庭。在本文中，我们将研究两部大致相同的法律在其各自的司法管辖范围内如何在法庭上实施和解释时呈现出不同的身份。我们揭示并分析了以下方面的差异：议会在什么阶段赋予个人决策权的意图；核心概念的司法发展；潜在的社会文化承诺；并概述了两个司法管辖区精神行为能力法的双向学习机会。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

The two lives of the Mental Capacity Act: rethinking East-west binaries in comparative analysis.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 in England and Wales and Singapore's Mental Capacity Act 2008 (which substantially transplants provisions from the former statute) might appear to be twins on paper, but they have gone on to lead very different lives. In this article, we examine how two broadly identical laws have taken on divergent identities within their respective jurisdictions when implemented and interpreted in the courtroom. We reveal and analyse differences in parliamentary intent concerning at what stage a person's decision-making agency is putatively empowered; judicial development of central concepts; underlying socio-cultural commitments; and outline opportunities for bi-directional learning in mental capacity law across both jurisdictions.

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

Medical Law Review MEDICAL ETHICS-

CiteScore

3.10

自引率

11.80%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： The Medical Law Review is established as an authoritative source of reference for academics, lawyers, legal and medical practitioners, law students, and anyone interested in healthcare and the law. The journal presents articles of international interest which provide thorough analyses and comment on the wide range of topical issues that are fundamental to this expanding area of law. In addition, commentary sections provide in depth explorations of topical aspects of the field.