Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T17:19:31.389Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Legislating personhood: realising the right to support in exercising legal capacity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2014

Eilionoir Flynn  and
Anna Arstein-Kerslake
Eilionoir Flynn*
Affiliation:
Centre for Disability Law and Policy, National University of Ireland, Galway
Anna Arstein-Kerslake*
Affiliation:
Centre for Disability Law and Policy, National University of Ireland, Galway
*
Elionoir.flynn@nuigalway.ac.uk
Anna.arsteinkerslake@nuigalway.ie
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper examines the regulation of ‘personhood’ through the granting or denying of legal capacity. It explores the development of the concept of personhood through the lens of moral and political philosophy. It highlights the problem of upholding cognition as a prerequisite for personhood or the granting of legal capacity because it results in the exclusion of people with cognitive disabilities (intellectual, psycho-social, mental disabilities, and others). The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) challenges this notion by guaranteeing respect for the right to legal capacity for people with disabilities on an equal basis with others and in all areas of life (Article 12). The paper uses the CRPD to argue for a conception of personhood that is divorced from cognition and a corresponding recognition of legal capacity as a universal attribute that all persons possess. Finally, a support model for the exercise of legal capacity is proposed as a possible alternative to the existing models of substituted decision-making that deny legal capacity and impose outside decision-makers.

Type
Articles
Information
International Journal of Law in Context , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , March 2014 , pp. 81 - 104
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bach, Michael and Kerzner, Lana (2010) ‘A New Paradigm for Protecting Autonomy and the Right to Legal Capacity’, prepared for the Law Commission of Ontario (October 2010). Available at: <http://www.lco-cdo.org/disabilities/bach-kerzner.pdf> (last accessed 10 February 2012)+(last+accessed+10+February+2012)>Google Scholar
Bartlett, Peter, Lewis, Oliver and Thorold, Oliver (2007) Mental Disability and the European Convention on Human Rights. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Blackstone, W. (1979) Commentaries on the Laws of England: A Facsimile of the First Edition of 1765–1769 with an Introduction by Stanley N. Katz. London and Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
BOOTH GLEN, Kristin (2012) ‘Changing Paradigms: Mental Capacity, Legal Capacity, Guardianship, and Beyond’. Columbia Human Rights Law Review 44: 93.Google Scholar
College of Psychiatry of Ireland, Submission to the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality on the Proposed Capacity and Guardianship Legislation – Preliminary Submission Paper (Dublin: CPI, 2011).Google Scholar
Damasio, Antonio (2010) Self Comes to Mind: Constructing the Conscious Brain. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
Danermark, B. and Gellerstedt, L. C. (2004) ‘Social Justice: Redistribution and Recognition – A Non-reductionist Perspective on Disability’. Disability & Society 19: 339–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dhanda, Amita (2006–2007) ‘Legal Capacity in the Disability Rights Convention: Stranglehold of the Past or Lodestar for the Future?’ Syracuse J. Int'l L. & Com. 34: 429.Google Scholar
Frankl, Viktor (1972) ‘Youth in Search of Meaning’, In Paper presented to Toronto Youth Corps (May 1972), online: <http://www.ted.com/talks/viktor_frankl_youth_in_search_of_meaning.html>..>Google Scholar
Freeman, Marsha A. (1989–1990) ‘Measuring Equality: A Comparative Perspective on Women's Legal Capacity and Constitutional Rights in Five Commonwealth Countries’. Berkeley Women's L.J. 5: 110, 112.Google Scholar
Frolik, Lawrence A. (1981) ‘Plenary Guardianship: An Analysis, A Critique and a Proposal for Reform’. Arizona Law Review 23: 599, 604.Google Scholar
Gigerenzer, G. (2007) Gut Feelings: The Intelligence of the Unconscious. New York: Viking Publishers.Google Scholar
International Disability Alliance (2008) ‘Legal Opinion on Article 12 of the CRPD’ (21 June 2008) at 1. Available at <www.internationaldisabilityalliance.org/representation/legal-capacity-working-group> (last accessed 13 October 2011)+(last+accessed+13+October+2011)>Google Scholar
Jaworska, Agnieszka. ‘Advance Directives and Substitute Decision-Making’, in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2009 edition). Available at: <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2009/entries/advance-directives/>..>Google Scholar
Jennings, B. (2010) ‘Agency and Moral Relationship in Dementia’, in Kittay, E. F. and Carlson, L. (eds), Cognitive Disability and its Challenge to Moral Philosophy. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell Publishers, 179.Google Scholar
Jones, M. and Basser-Marks, L. A. (1998) ‘The Limitations on the Use of Law to Promote Rights: An Assessment of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992’, in Haurit, M., Sampford, C. and Blencowe, S. (eds), Justice for People with Disabilities – Legal and Institutional Issues.Google Scholar
Kittay, E. F. (1999) Love's Labor: Essays on Women, Equality and Dependence. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kukathas, Chandran and Pettit, Philip (1990) Rawls: A Theory of Justice and its Critics. Stanford; CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Law Reform Commission (2006) Report: Vulnerable Adults and the Law. Dublin: Law Reform Commission.Google Scholar
Lehrer, Jonah (2009) How We Decide. New York: Houghton Miflin Harcourt Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Lewis, Oliver (2011) ‘Advancing Legal Capacity Jurisprudence’. European Human Rights Law Review 6: 700.Google Scholar
Locke, John (1988 [1689]) Two Treatises of Government. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McSherry, Bernadette (2012) ‘Legal Capacity Under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities’. Journal of Law and Medicine 20: 22–27.Google ScholarPubMed
Minkowitz, Tina (2006–2007) ‘The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Right to Be Free from Nonconsensual Psychiatric Interventions’. Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce 34: 405, 408.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, Martha (2006) Frontiers of Justice. Cambridge, MA and London: Belknap Press, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner of Human Rights (2005) Legal Capacity (Background Conference Document), 1, 13. Available at: <www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/rights/ahc6documents.htm> (last accessed 13 October 2011).+(last+accessed+13+October+2011).>Google Scholar
Quinn, Gerard (2010) ‘Personhood and Legal Capacity: Perspectives on the Paradigm Shift of Article 12 CRPD,’ in Paper presented at Conference on Disability and Legal Capacity under the CRPD, Harvard Law School, Boston, 20 February 2010, available at: <www.inclusionireland.ie/documents/HarvardLegalCapacitygqdraft2.doc> (last accessed 13 October 2011).+(last+accessed+13+October+2011).>Google Scholar
Quinn, Gerard (2011a) ‘Legal Capacity Law Reform: The Revolution of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disability’. Frontline 83, 26–27.Google Scholar
Quinn, Gerard (2011b) ‘Rethinking Personhood: New Directions in Legal Capacity Law & Policy’, Lecture, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, 29 April 2011.Google Scholar
Quinn, Gerard and Arstein-Kerslake, Anna (2012) ‘Restoring the “Human” in “Human Rights” – Personhood and Doctrinal Innovation in the UN Disability Convention’, in Gearty, C. and Douzinas, C. (eds), The Cambridge Companion to Human Rights Law. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (1993) Political Liberalism. New York and Chichester: Columbia University Press, 21.Google Scholar
Rawls, John (1999) A Theory of Justice (rev. edin) (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999) at xii.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rehbinder, Manfred (1971) ‘Status, Contract, and the Welfare State’. Stanford Law Review 23: 941–55, 942.Google Scholar
Sen, Amartya (1999) Development as Freedom. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Silvers, A., Wasserman, D. T. and Mahowald, M. B. (1998) Disability, Difference, Discrimination: Perspectives on Justice in Bioethics and Public Policy, Vol. 94. Lanham; MD and Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
Stark, C. (2007) ‘How to Include the Severely Disabled in a Contractarian Theory of Justice’. Journal of Political Philosophy 15: 127.Google Scholar
Stein, M. S. (2006) Distributive Justice and Disability: Utilitarianism against Agalitarianism. Newhaven: Yale University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The Law Reform Commission [Ireland] (2005) Consultation Paper on Vulnerable Adults and the Law: Capacity, pp. 147–57, online: <http://www.lawreform.ie/_fileupload/consultation%20papers/Consultation%20Paper%20on%20Capacity.pdf>..>Google Scholar
Wong, S. I. (2010) ‘Duties of Justice to Citizens with Cognitive Disabilities’, in Kittay, E. F. and Carlson, L. (eds), Cognitive Disability and its Challenge to Moral Philosophy. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar