Report on Bioethics: Advance Care Directives - Law Reform ...

have recognised that both rights are interlinked as the ―nature of the right toprivacy must be seen as to ensure the dignity and freedom of an individual.‖ 1241.97 In In re a Ward of Court (No 2) 125 Denham J noted that the 44 yearold woman in that case, who had been in a persistent vegetative state (PVS) forover 20 years, had a constitutional right to be treated with dignity and that thisright does not disappear when a person becomes incapacitated. The SupremeCourt in that case decided that the insertion of a tube to feed the woman wasintrusive and constituted an interference with the integrity of her body. 126Denham J also noted that ―merely because medical treatment becomesnecessary to sustain life does not mean that the right to privacy is lost.‖ 127 Theright to privacy and dignity remains while a person is alive and is not dependenton capacity.1.98 The Commission agrees with the views expressed in the Ward ofCourt case that respect for a person‘s treatment preferences is consistent withtheir right to privacy and, in the context of decisions at the end of life, isconsistent with the right to a dignified death. This should be reflected in theCommission‘s proposed statutory framework for advance care directives.1.99 In its 2006 <strong>Report</strong> on Vulnerable Adults and the Law the Commissionrecommended that the proposed mental capacity legislation should include aguiding principle that due regard be given to a person‘s dignity, privacy andautonomy; 128 and the Commission very much welcomes that this has beenincorporated into the Government‘s Scheme of a Mental Capacity Bill 2008. TheCommission is equally of the opinion that the principles of autonomy, dignityand privacy of the individual should form part of the legislative framework foradvance care directives, in the wider context of the Government‘s proposedmental capacity legislation.1.100 The Commission recommends that the principles of autonomy,dignity and privacy of the individual should form part of the legislative frameworkfor advance care directives.124125126127128Kennedy v Ireland [1987] IR 587, at 592 (Hamilton P).[1996] 2 IR 79, at 163.[1996] 2 IR 79, at 124-125 per Hamilton CJ.Ibid, at 163.<strong>Report</strong> on Vulnerable Adults and the Law (LRC 83-2006), paragraph 2.106; andsection 4(e) of the draft Scheme of a Mental Capacity Bill (Appendix to <strong>Report</strong>,p.171).40