Realising ‘will, preferences and rights’

Reconciling differences on best practice support for decision-making

Bibliographic Data

ID14970775
AuthorsTerry Carney (0000-0002-3612-5986, School of Law, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia, corresponding author), Shih-Ning Then (0000-0002-8211-1868, Australian Centre for Health Law Research, School of Law, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia), Christine Bigby (0000-0001-7001-8976, Living with Disability Research Centre, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia), Ilan Wiesel (0000-0002-7244-1775, The University of Melbourne), Jacinta Douglas (0000-0003-0940-6624, Living with Disability Research Centre, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia), Elizabeth Smith (0000-0003-3937-1055, Living with Disability Research Centre, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia)
Year2019
Volume28
Issue4
Pages357-379
Publication date2019-10-02
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueGriffith Law Review (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1038-3441 • E-ISSN: 1839-4205
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/10383441.2019.1690741
OpenAlexW2987629258
LanguageEN
Citations received5
References cited40

‘Will, preferences and rights’ is the new guiding principle for all support for or exercise of decision-making under the Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities, but its meaning is disputed and practice implications are poorly understood. This article explores key debates across disciplines and draws on grounded theory fieldwork findings to bring greater clarity to the principle within law, policy and practice settings. It is argued that the principle calls for a nuanced understanding which cautions against expectations that mere enactment into law or adoption within programs of support will prove to be a panacea

CLARITY · Convention · Epistemology · Law and economics · Meaning (existential · Panacea (medicine · Political science · Project commissioning · Public relations · Publishing · Sociology · Disability Rights and Representation · Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints · Healthcare innovation and challenges · Law