We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Individuals with dementia may appear before the court in different roles: as victims, as witnesses, and as those standing up for their rights. While there is growing interest in the rights of older persons with dementia, relatively little empirical data exists regarding their actual interactions in courts. Therefore, the goal of this study was to empirically map this legal terrain.
Methods:
This study used a descriptive quantitative method. A computerized search of a national legal database limited to the period 2004–2014 and a screening process for the results were used to establish a sample of 280 court rulings that directly addressed dementia. All cases were analyzed and categorized into the following four criteria groups: characteristics of the person with dementia; characteristics of the legal procedure; the legal substance of the case; and the legal outcome.
Results:
The majority of cases involved a single, very-elderly (i.e. over 80 years) woman, living in the community, with unspecified dementia. The majority of cases were heard and decided in lower level courts, addressing a broad range of primarily non-criminal legal issues. Finally, in the majority of non-criminal cases, the person with dementia was found to be legally capable, whereas in the majority of criminal cases, the person with dementia was found incapable.
Conclusions:
The legal needs and rights of persons with dementia are much broader than issues of legal capacity or social protection. Deeper knowledge and more research is needed in order to fully understand the contexts in which dementia is constructed under the law.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.