Mental capacity in relationship decision-making, dialogue, and autonomy
Recent legal developments challenge how valid the concept of mental capacity is in determining whether individuals with impairments can make decisions about their care and treatment. Kong defends a concept of mental capacity but argues that such assessments must consider how relationships and dialog...
Gespeichert in:
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | E-Book |
| Sprache: | English |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
2017
|
| Schriftenreihe: | Cambridge bioethics and law
|
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 i 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ZDB-20-CTM-CR9781316683088 | ||
| 003 | UkCbUP | ||
| 005 | 20170726091009.0 | ||
| 006 | m|||||o||d|||||||| | ||
| 007 | cr|||||||||||| | ||
| 008 | 160112s2017||||enk o ||1 0|eng|d | ||
| 020 | |a 9781316683088 | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Kong, Camillia | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Mental capacity in relationship |b decision-making, dialogue, and autonomy |c Camillia Kong |
| 264 | 1 | |a Cambridge |b Cambridge University Press |c 2017 | |
| 300 | |a 1 Online-Ressource (xiii, 258 Seiten) | ||
| 336 | |b txt | ||
| 337 | |b c | ||
| 338 | |b cr | ||
| 490 | 1 | |a Cambridge bioethics and law | |
| 520 | |a Recent legal developments challenge how valid the concept of mental capacity is in determining whether individuals with impairments can make decisions about their care and treatment. Kong defends a concept of mental capacity but argues that such assessments must consider how relationships and dialogue can enable or disable the decision-making abilities of these individuals. This is thoroughly investigated using an interdisciplinary approach that combines philosophy and legal analysis of the law in England and Wales, the European Court of Human Rights, and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. By exploring key concepts underlying mental capacity, the investigation concludes that both primary relationships and capacity assessments themselves must display key competencies to ensure that autonomy skills are promoted and encouraged. This ultimately provides scope for justifiable interventions into disabling relationships and articulates the dialogical practices that help better situate, interpret, and understand the choices and actions of individuals with impairments. | ||
| 776 | 0 | 8 | |i Erscheint auch als |n Druck-Ausgabe |z 9781107164000 |
| 776 | 0 | 8 | |i Erscheint auch als |n Druck-Ausgabe |z 9781316615706 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |l TUM01 |p ZDB-20-CTM |q TUM_PDA_CTM |u https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316683088 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a ZDB-20-CTM | ||
| 912 | |a ZDB-20-CTM | ||
| 049 | |a DE-91 | ||
Datensatz im Suchindex
| DE-BY-TUM_katkey | ZDB-20-CTM-CR9781316683088 |
|---|---|
| _version_ | 1818779687073087488 |
| adam_text | |
| any_adam_object | |
| author | Kong, Camillia |
| author_facet | Kong, Camillia |
| author_role | |
| author_sort | Kong, Camillia |
| author_variant | c k ck |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | localTUM |
| collection | ZDB-20-CTM |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1017/9781316683088 |
| format | eBook |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01936nam a2200265 i 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ZDB-20-CTM-CR9781316683088</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">UkCbUP</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20170726091009.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="006">m|||||o||d||||||||</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr||||||||||||</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">160112s2017||||enk o ||1 0|eng|d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9781316683088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kong, Camillia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Mental capacity in relationship</subfield><subfield code="b">decision-making, dialogue, and autonomy</subfield><subfield code="c">Camillia Kong</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Cambridge</subfield><subfield code="b">Cambridge University Press</subfield><subfield code="c">2017</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">1 Online-Ressource (xiii, 258 Seiten)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">c</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">cr</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="490" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Cambridge bioethics and law</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Recent legal developments challenge how valid the concept of mental capacity is in determining whether individuals with impairments can make decisions about their care and treatment. Kong defends a concept of mental capacity but argues that such assessments must consider how relationships and dialogue can enable or disable the decision-making abilities of these individuals. This is thoroughly investigated using an interdisciplinary approach that combines philosophy and legal analysis of the law in England and Wales, the European Court of Human Rights, and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. By exploring key concepts underlying mental capacity, the investigation concludes that both primary relationships and capacity assessments themselves must display key competencies to ensure that autonomy skills are promoted and encouraged. This ultimately provides scope for justifiable interventions into disabling relationships and articulates the dialogical practices that help better situate, interpret, and understand the choices and actions of individuals with impairments.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="776" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Erscheint auch als</subfield><subfield code="n">Druck-Ausgabe</subfield><subfield code="z">9781107164000</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="776" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Erscheint auch als</subfield><subfield code="n">Druck-Ausgabe</subfield><subfield code="z">9781316615706</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="l">TUM01</subfield><subfield code="p">ZDB-20-CTM</subfield><subfield code="q">TUM_PDA_CTM</subfield><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316683088</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-20-CTM</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-20-CTM</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-91</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| id | ZDB-20-CTM-CR9781316683088 |
| illustrated | Not Illustrated |
| indexdate | 2024-12-18T12:04:34Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9781316683088 |
| language | English |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-91 DE-BY-TUM |
| owner_facet | DE-91 DE-BY-TUM |
| physical | 1 Online-Ressource (xiii, 258 Seiten) |
| psigel | ZDB-20-CTM |
| publishDate | 2017 |
| publishDateSearch | 2017 |
| publishDateSort | 2017 |
| publisher | Cambridge University Press |
| record_format | marc |
| series2 | Cambridge bioethics and law |
| spelling | Kong, Camillia Mental capacity in relationship decision-making, dialogue, and autonomy Camillia Kong Cambridge Cambridge University Press 2017 1 Online-Ressource (xiii, 258 Seiten) txt c cr Cambridge bioethics and law Recent legal developments challenge how valid the concept of mental capacity is in determining whether individuals with impairments can make decisions about their care and treatment. Kong defends a concept of mental capacity but argues that such assessments must consider how relationships and dialogue can enable or disable the decision-making abilities of these individuals. This is thoroughly investigated using an interdisciplinary approach that combines philosophy and legal analysis of the law in England and Wales, the European Court of Human Rights, and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. By exploring key concepts underlying mental capacity, the investigation concludes that both primary relationships and capacity assessments themselves must display key competencies to ensure that autonomy skills are promoted and encouraged. This ultimately provides scope for justifiable interventions into disabling relationships and articulates the dialogical practices that help better situate, interpret, and understand the choices and actions of individuals with impairments. Erscheint auch als Druck-Ausgabe 9781107164000 Erscheint auch als Druck-Ausgabe 9781316615706 TUM01 ZDB-20-CTM TUM_PDA_CTM https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316683088 Volltext |
| spellingShingle | Kong, Camillia Mental capacity in relationship decision-making, dialogue, and autonomy |
| title | Mental capacity in relationship decision-making, dialogue, and autonomy |
| title_auth | Mental capacity in relationship decision-making, dialogue, and autonomy |
| title_exact_search | Mental capacity in relationship decision-making, dialogue, and autonomy |
| title_full | Mental capacity in relationship decision-making, dialogue, and autonomy Camillia Kong |
| title_fullStr | Mental capacity in relationship decision-making, dialogue, and autonomy Camillia Kong |
| title_full_unstemmed | Mental capacity in relationship decision-making, dialogue, and autonomy Camillia Kong |
| title_short | Mental capacity in relationship |
| title_sort | mental capacity in relationship decision making dialogue and autonomy |
| title_sub | decision-making, dialogue, and autonomy |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316683088 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT kongcamillia mentalcapacityinrelationshipdecisionmakingdialogueandautonomy |