Access to equal recognition before the law for persons with mental disabilities through supported decision-making in Scotland.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Equal recognition before the law of persons with mental disabilities, as identified as a right in Article 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), has the potential to reshape mental health and incapacity laws nationally and internationally. The adoption of the CRPD in 2006 signalled a ‘paradigm shift’ in, amongst other things, how we approach the recognition of legal capacity for persons with mental disabilities.In April 2014 the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities published its General Comment on Article 12 which further emphasised this shift.(1) The General Comment seeks to transform how we approach the recognition of legal capacity and states that mental ‘incapacity’ can never justify the removal of legal capacity. Individuals must therefore be provided with the necessary support to exercise their legal capacity. Forms of substituted decision-making for those deemed to be lacking capacity are invalid under this approach. The United Kingdom is due to be considered by the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in October 2015. Thus far the Committee has repeatedly called on states it has considered and for which it has published its concluding observations, to ‘take immediate steps to revise the relevant laws and replace substituted decision-making with supported decision-making.’(2)Across Commonwealth countries, principally Australia and Canada, there has been significant developments in relation to Article 12 and supported decision-making. Law Commissions in various Australian and Canadian states and provinces, as well as the federal governments, have been proposing and trialling various supported decision-making models. Various forms of supported decision-making can also be identified in Scotland. The common legal traditions shared between Australia, Canada and the UK mean that there is much for Scotland to learn from and contribute to promoting a common understanding and consensus in this complex area. The issue of legal capacity and its exercise underpins many aspects of law taught within law schools.In view of the approach taken by the Committee and Commonwealth developments, this paper evaluates the extent to which Scotland’s mental health and incapacity laws are compatible with its international obligations under Article 12 CRPD and explores the potential link between the UK’s CRPD and ECHR obligations in this area. It will also look to Commonwealth examples of supported decision-making in order to build upon current understandings of legal capacity and supported decision-making and to encourage cross-jurisdictional consensus through education of policy makers and practitioners.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,011 | 0,033 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,012 | 0,009 |
| Communication savante | 0,009 | 0,007 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,015 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,010 | 0,011 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,020 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».