No abstract

Covid-19 outbreaks in care homes expose serious inadequacies in social care services across the UK. Data from across the world show that deaths from covid-19 mainly occur among older people, particularly those over 80. 1 By 12 April 10 612 deaths had been reported in the UK 2-40% of deaths have occurred in those aged 60-79 and 52% in those 80 years or over. 3 Close to 1.5 million vulnerable people are currently self-isolating indoors for 12 weeks. 4 These include many older people and people with disabilities and chronic illnesses. Many are essentially in solitary confinement. Many residents in care homes are trapped in their rooms, with no visits from relatives and minimal interactions with staff. The decision to exclude relatives means that care homes have become closed institutions, increasing the risk that people are inappropriately denied hospital admission as well as the risk of neglect and abuse. 5 6 Of equal concern are plans to transfer patients recovering from covid-19 from the NHS into empty nursing home beds. 7 Editorials EDITORIALS

Twenty‐five years ago it was common practice to bring about the deaths of some children with learning disabilities or physical impairments. This paper considers a small number of landmark cases in the early 1980s that confronted this practice. These cases illustrate a process by which external forces (social, philosophical, political, and professional) moved through the legal system to effect a profound change outside that system – primarily in the (then) largely closed domain of medical conduct/practice. These cases are considered from a socio‐legal perspective. In particular, the paper analyses the reasons why they surfaced at that time, the social and political contexts that shaped the judgments, and their legacy.

Summary In two recent cases the courts have declined to accord to carers any formal right to a private and family life with the person for whom they care. This paper briefly considers why it is that the courts still view carers as people merely in need of services and sympathy – rather than people entitled to such basic human rights.

No abstract