Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/1942/38134
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | OPGENHAFFEN, Tim | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-09-26T07:32:46Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2022-09-26T07:32:46Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2022 | - |
dc.date.submitted | 2022-09-07T13:39:26Z | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Human rights law review, 22 (3) (Art N° ngac021) | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1942/38134 | - |
dc.description.abstract | The right to legal capacity (Article 12) is the most contested realization of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). If implemented, it would revolutionize the position of persons with psychosocial disabilities, intellectual disabilities and other cognitive conditions. Yet its implementation has been hindered by conceptual misunderstandings and a lack of distinction between the key questions in the debate. This contribution first demonstrates that advocates and opponents apply 'substitute decision-making' and 'legal capacity' differently, leading to different expectations. Second, it substantiates that once all the concepts are understood correctly, three distinct questions underpin the interpretation of Article 12 CRPD: (1) What makes a person's will reliable? (2) What is good support? and (3) How can such a reliable will be diverged from, given other interests? Instead of giving the answers, this contribution brings consistency to the debate and proposes a pathways for a future approach to legal capacity. | - |
dc.language.iso | en | - |
dc.publisher | OXFORD UNIV PRESS | - |
dc.rights | The Author(s) [2022]. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model) | - |
dc.subject.other | legal capacity | - |
dc.subject.other | psychosocial disability | - |
dc.subject.other | intellectual disability | - |
dc.subject.other | CRPD | - |
dc.subject.other | substitute decision-making | - |
dc.title | The Universal Right to Legal Capacity-Clearing the Haze | - |
dc.type | Journal Contribution | - |
dc.identifier.issue | 3 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 22 | - |
local.bibliographicCitation.jcat | A1 | - |
dc.description.notes | Opgenhaffen, T (corresponding author), KULeuven, Inst Social Law, Leuven, Belgium.; Opgenhaffen, T (corresponding author), Hasselt Univ, Hasselt, Belgium. | - |
dc.description.notes | tim.opgenhaffen@kuleuven.be | - |
local.publisher.place | GREAT CLARENDON ST, OXFORD OX2 6DP, ENGLAND | - |
local.type.refereed | Refereed | - |
local.type.specified | Article | - |
local.bibliographicCitation.artnr | ngac021 | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1093/hrlr/ngac021 | - |
dc.identifier.isi | 000834997400002 | - |
local.provider.type | wosris | - |
local.description.affiliation | [Opgenhaffen, Tim] KULeuven, Inst Social Law, Leuven, Belgium. | - |
local.description.affiliation | [Opgenhaffen, Tim] Hasselt Univ, Hasselt, Belgium. | - |
local.uhasselt.international | no | - |
item.fullcitation | OPGENHAFFEN, Tim (2022) The Universal Right to Legal Capacity-Clearing the Haze. In: Human rights law review, 22 (3) (Art N° ngac021). | - |
item.validation | ecoom 2023 | - |
item.accessRights | Closed Access | - |
item.fulltext | No Fulltext | - |
item.contributor | OPGENHAFFEN, Tim | - |
crisitem.journal.issn | 1461-7781 | - |
crisitem.journal.eissn | 1744-1021 | - |
Appears in Collections: | Research publications |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.