School of Law, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire ST5 5BG, UK.
Med Law Rev. 2021 Aug 9;29(1):143-156. doi: 10.1093/medlaw/fwaa028.
In A Local Authority v JB and A Local Authority v AW, the Court of Appeal and Court of Protection, respectively, had to consider questions regarding decision-making about sexual relationships. This case commentary suggests that both decisions are to be welcomed in many ways, not least in the primacy they give to the role of consent within sexual relationships. However, working through their implications also reveals a number of perplexing legal and practical binds that cannot easily be overcome, and that in fact stem from the way that the Mental Capacity Act 2005 itself works. In light of this, the commentary concludes by suggesting that it is likely that there will be continued dissatisfaction with this area of law and hints that the time may have come to rethink sexual capacity.
在 A 地方当局诉 JB 和 A 地方当局诉 AW 案中，上诉法院和保护法院分别需要考虑有关性关系决策的问题。本案例评论认为，这两项决定在许多方面都是值得欢迎的，尤其是在他们赋予性关系中同意的角色以首要地位方面。然而，通过探讨其影响，也揭示了一些令人困惑的法律和实际困境，这些困境并非轻易能够克服，实际上源于 2005 年《精神能力法案》本身的运作方式。有鉴于此，本评论最后提出，人们可能会继续对这一法律领域感到不满，并暗示可能是重新思考性能力的时候了。
