A Law Society working group of legal experts, medical practitioners and academics authored the report, published today, to highlight the need for reform and make recommendations for legislative solutions.

While the Mental Capacity Act has provided a degree of clarity in England and Wales, Scots law is ambiguous and incomplete by comparison. The result is a lack of certainty for individuals, their families and the medical and other professionals supporting them.

Adrian Ward, convener of the Law Society of Scotland’s Mental Health and Disability Sub-Committee, said: “Members of the public have been encouraged to make ‘advance directives’, but there is no statutory provision for them in Scotland beyond those limited to mental health matters. Nor is the law clear about how to ensure maximum effectiveness of decisions that they might wish to make in advance of incapacity.

“Such decisions can cover a wide range of matters, such as what to do with the house and contents, where they would - and would not - wish to be placed in a care home, what to do with a pet they can no longer look after, and so on – as well as medical matters, but going far beyond medical matters.

“The significant characteristic of ‘advance choices’, as we call them, is that people make their own decision in advance. They do not entrust decisions to someone else and they can cover the situation where there is no-one whom they would wish to make those difficult decisions on their behalf.

“The failure of Scots Law to provide adequate mechanisms and clarity may amount to non-compliance with European and international human rights requirements, and it is imperative that this issue is addressed as a matter of urgency.”

The report identifies, analyses and addresses all of the matters which, it suggests, need to be covered in legislation for advance choices, including offering criteria for situations in which an advance choice should be disapplied, and suggesting provisions to address the tension between offering maximum availability of advance choices and the need for certainty.

The report also offers a basic formulation of the doctor-patient relationship, and resulting obligations, responsibilities and potential liabilities, for application in any situation where medical decision-making cannot proceed sufficiently quickly or at all, in accordance with the consent of the patient.

Jennifer Paton, Law Society policy executive and committee secretary, said: “The difficulties around advance choices and medical decision making are varied and complex and the working group’s recommendations are comprehensive in their address of the terminology, ethical considerations, legislation, common law and human rights issues.

“It is essential that any proposals for reform align themselves with the developing work of the Scottish Mental Health Law Review, putting human rights front and centre of the discussion.

“This extensive and thorough report does just that and we look forward to engaging with law makers to help bring about change for the benefit of patients, doctors, lawyers and all those who might find themselves affected by these challenging and sometimes distressing circumstances.”