ABSTRACT
Hospitals sometimes seek judicial authorisation for amputations in incapacitated adults. Only an elementary grasp of the concept of human rights is necessary to see that a mutilating procedure should only be imposed against the will of an incapacitated patient after referral to a neutral authority. The court was confronted with Mr B, 73 years old, with a putrefying foot, diabetes, and schizophrenia. He had only days to live without surgery. The voices had discouraged him from taking medications, perhaps accounting for his poor compliance with antipsychotic medications. His surgeons, faced with systemic sepsis originating from uncontrolled osteomyelitis, were able only to persuade Mr B to acquiesce to changes of his dressing. The weight that should be accorded to an incapacitated person's beliefs and wishes and feelings was discussed in court. The Trust pleaded that the views expressed by a person who lacked capacity could be considered to have less weight than those expressed by a person with capacity.
