| 翻訳と辞書 |
| Starson v Swayze ： ウィキペディア英語版 |
Starson v Swayze
''Starson v Swayze'', 2003 SCC 32, () 1 S.C.R. 722 was an important case at the Supreme Court of Canada that considered the legal requirements for determining if a person is capable of making decisions regarding their medical treatment. On December 24, 1998, Dr. Ian Gary Swayze declared Professor Scott (a.k.a. Scott Jeffery Schutzman) incapable of consenting to proposed psychiatric treatment and should therefore be involuntarily medicated as directed.〔(【引用サイトリンク】date= September–October 2003 )〕 Starson applied to a legal body known as the Consent and Capacity Board for a review of this decision. On June 6, 2003, the Supreme Court of Canada published its decision in the case. In a 6 to 3 decision, the majority held that Starson had the right to refuse medication.〔("Right to Refuse Treatment" ), ''Rule of Law'' blog, August 2006. accessed 23 September 2009.〕
==Background==
Schutzman, who changed his name to Starson and preferred to be called "Professor", obtained an electrical engineering degree and held a strong interest in physics (although it was not his profession). He was diagnosed with bipolar disorder. He appreciated that he was not 'normal' and that he had problems dealing with people. He acknowledged that he had mental health issues, but he refused to accept his condition as an illness. He also refused to consent to the course of medications that his physicians recommended for fear that it would diminish his thinking. He would have accepted psychotherapy but no medication.〔''Starson v. Swayze'', 2003 SCC 32 at paras 65-67.〕 Dr. Ian Gary Swayze, who was not Starson's primary doctor but who had reviewed his medical charts, testified first. "()his charting is ominous. It would suggest to me a chronic, unremitting course which likely would be a future for Professor Starson, should he not receive treatment," Dr. Swayze testified.〔''Starson v. Swayze'' (2003)〕
The Board decided that because Starson did not recognize that he was ill and that he needed treatment, the Board decided that Starson was not able to understand the consequences of consent; he failed to appreciate the risks and the benefits and therefore he lacked the capacity to make a decision as to treatment. Starson was subsequently charged multiple times with uttering death threats and has spent most of his later life in institutions.
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』
■ウィキペディアで「Starson v Swayze」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
| 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|