Skip to main content

Research Repository

Advanced Search

The good, the bad, and the 'vulnerable older adult'

Pritchard-Jones

The good, the bad, and the 'vulnerable older adult' Thumbnail


Authors



Abstract

Recent declarations by the Court of Appeal indicate that the inherent jurisdiction has survived the implementation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 for adults considered ‘vulnerable’ and whose decision-making is threatened by reasons other than mental impairment – such occasions may include instances of elder abuse. In this paper I argue, however, that the post-Mental Capacity Act courts have adopted a confused and outmoded concept of the vulnerable older adult, in particular where decision-making is threatened by abusive interpersonal relationships experienced by an older individual. This has particular implications in terms of the types of remedies imposed by the courts on older adults in such circumstances. In this article I suggest that by being more cognisant of recent more nuanced understandings of vulnerability, the courts may be better suited to identifying, and responding to perceived sources of vulnerability in a way that is more empowering for the older adult.

Citation

Pritchard-Jones. (2016). The good, the bad, and the 'vulnerable older adult'. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 51-72. https://doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2016.1145838

Acceptance Date Jun 27, 2015
Publication Date Feb 24, 2016
Journal Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law
Print ISSN 0964-9069
Publisher Taylor and Francis
Pages 51-72
DOI https://doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2016.1145838
Keywords Capacity, decision-making, elder abuse, inherent jurisdiction, older adults, vulnerability
Publisher URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2016.1145838

Files





You might also like



Downloadable Citations