Dr Cressida Auckland

Dr Cressida Auckland

Assistant Professor

Department of Law

Telephone
020-7955-7268
Room No
NAB 7.15
Languages
English
Key Expertise
Medical law; mental capacity and end of life decision-making

About me

Cressida joined the Law Department as an Assistant Professor in 2019. Her research and teaching focuses on medical law, in particular on issues relating to mental capacity and end of life decision-making.

Before arriving at LSE, she was a lecturer at both Merton College and Corpus Christi College, Oxford, as well as a guest teacher at LSE. She completed her doctorate, entitled 'The cusp of capacity’, at Merton College, Oxford, which considered the robustness of the concept of capacity in law, and the appropriate legal treatment of people who are found to lack legal capacity. Prior to this, Cressida read Law at Merton College, Oxford and completed a Masters in Medical Law and Ethics at King’s College, London. During her DPhil, she was also a Postgraduate Research Fellow at the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology.

Administrative support: Fiona Thomas

Research Interests

Medical law, and, in particular, issues relating to mental capacity and end of life decision-making. 

Teaching

Books

Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Young Children: A Comparative Perspective (forthcoming, Hart Publishing) (with I. Goold and J. Herring)

In the wake of the Charlie Gard and Alfie Evans cases, a wide-ranging international conversation was started regarding alternative thresholds for intervention and the different balances that can be made in weighing up the rights and interests of the child, the parent's rights and responsibilities and the role of medical professionals and the courts. This collection provides a comparative perspective on these issues by bringing together analysis from a range of jurisdictions across Europe, North and South America, Africa and Asia.

Contextualising the differences and similarities, and drawing out the cultural and social values that inform the approach in different countries, this volume is highly valuable to scholars across jurisdictions, not only to inform their own local debate on how best to navigate such cases, but also to foster inter-jurisdictional debate on the issues. The book brings together commentators from the fields of law, medical ethics, and clinical medicine across the world, actively drawing on the view from the clinic as well as philosophical, legal and sociological perspectives on the crucial question of who should decide about the fate of a child suffering from a serious illness. In doing so, the collection offers comprehensive treatment of the key questions around whether the current best interests approach is still appropriate, and if not, what the alternatives are. It engages head-on with the concerns seen in both the academic and popular literature that there is a need to reconsider the orthodoxy in this area.

click here for publisher's site

 


 

Parental Rights, Best Interests and Significant Harms: Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Children Post-Great Ormond Street Hospital v Yates (Hart Publishing, 2019) (with I. Goold and J. Herring)

This timely collection brings together philosophical, legal and sociological perspectives on the crucial question of who should make decisions about the fate of a child suffering from a serious illness. In particular, the collection looks at whether the current 'best interests' threshold is the appropriate boundary for legal intervention, or whether it would be more appropriate to adopt the 'risk of significant harm' approach proposed in Gard. It explores the roles of parents, doctors and the courts in making decisions on behalf of children, actively drawing on perspectives from the clinic as well as academia and practice. In doing so, it teases out the potential risks of inappropriate state intrusion in parental decision-making, and considers how we might address them.

click here for publisher's site

Articles

  • ‘A Façade of Futility’ Law Quarterly Review (forthcoming, 2021)
  • ‘Resolving Disagreement: A Multi-Jurisdictional Comparative Analysis of Disputes about Children’s Medical Care’ Medical Law Review (forthcoming) (with I. Goold) 
  • ‘Re-evaluating ‘best interests’ in the wake of Raqeeb v Barts NHS Foundation Trust & Anors [2019] EWHC 2531 (Admin)’ Modern Law Review (forthcoming) (with I. Goold)
  • 'Legal and Cultural Differences in Medical Decision-Making on behalf of Very Young Children' in I. Goold, C.Auckland and J. Herring, Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Young Children: A Comparative Perspective (forthcoming, Hart Publishing)
  • 'Medical-Decision Making on Behalf of Children in English and Welsh Law: A Child-Centred Best Interests Approach' in I. Goold, C.Auckland and J. Herring, Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Young Children: A Comparative Perspective (forthcoming, Hart Publishing)
  • 'Claiming in Contract for Wrongful Conception' Law Quarterly Review (2020) 136 (Jan) pp.45-51 (with I. Goold)
  • 'Parental Rights, Best Interests and Significant Harms'Cambridge Law Journal (2019) 78 (2) pp. 287-323 (with I. Goold) 
  • 'Futility' in I. Goold, J. Herring and C. Auckland (eds), Parental Rights, Best Interests and Significant Harms: Medical Decision-Making on Behalf of Children Post-Great Ormond Street Hospital v Yates (Hart Publishing, 2019)
  • 'Defining the Limits of Parental Authority: Charlie Gard, Best Interests and the Risk of Significant Harm Threshold' (2018) 134 Law Quarterly Review 37-42 (with I. Goold)
  • 'Protecting me from my Directive: Ensuring appropriate safeguards for advance directives in dementia' (2018) 1 Medical Law Review 73-97
  • 'Muddying the waters of end of life decision-making: Tracey and the encroachment of law on clinical judgment' (2016) 3 Elder Law Journal 264-272
  • 'More presumptions please? Wishes, feelings and best interests decision-making' (2015) 3 Elder Law Journal 293-301 (with A. Ruck Keene)