Deception in care giving: legal and ethical complexities in the administration of covert medication

Covert medication (CM) - the surreptitious administration of drugs in food or drink is often framed as a ‘moral gamble’ and remains a pervasive yet controversial necessity in the care of older people with cognitive impairments. As global populations age and neurodegenerative conditions increase, the clinical reliance on CM has become structurally entrenched. This article evaluates the practice within the legal jurisdiction of England and Wales, specifically through the dual lenses of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005) and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). It provides an original contribution to the literature by synthesising the clinical application of CM with the statutory duty of candour under Regulation 20, proposing a ‘tripartite test’ of Imminence, Gravity and Exhaustion to bridge the current regulatory dissonance. It explores the fundamental tension between the clinical duty of beneficence and the patient’s right to bodily integrity, specifically addressing the tension between the statutory duty of candour and clinical strategies predicated on concealment. By distinguishing between the physiological risks of overt coercion and the 'quiet deception' of CM, the paper rebuts deontological claims that CM constitutes an irreconcilable violation of rights. Instead, applying a rule-utilitarian framework, it argues that CM is a benevolent necessity when used to prevent certain physiological harm and preserve residual dignity. Furthermore, the article analyses judicial responses, integrating recent precedents such as Re A [2022] and An NHS Trust v XB [2020], to define a framework of necessity required to legitimise the practice. Ultimately, the paper concludes that while CM carries a significant moral and relational cost, it remains an ethically justifiable measure of last resort within a transparent English and Welsh legal architecture that prioritises accountability and consultation over administrative convenience.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Law and Psychiatry
Published
2026-09-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2026.102279
Primary Topic
Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Deception in care giving: legal and ethical complexities in the administration of covert medication

Nicola; id_orcid 0000-0001-6640-337X Glover-Thomas
International Journal of Law and Psychiatry
Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
article

Deception in care giving: legal and ethical complexities in the administration of covert medication

Nicola; id_orcid 0000-0001-6640-337X Glover-Thomas
article en

Abstract

Covert medication (CM) - the surreptitious administration of drugs in food or drink is often framed as a ‘moral gamble’ and remains a pervasive yet controversial necessity in the care of older people with cognitive impairments. As global populations age and neurodegenerative conditions increase, the clinical reliance on CM has become structurally entrenched. This article evaluates the practice within the legal jurisdiction of England and Wales, specifically through the dual lenses of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005) and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). It provides an original contribution to the literature by synthesising the clinical application of CM with the statutory duty of candour under Regulation 20, proposing a ‘tripartite test’ of Imminence, Gravity and Exhaustion to bridge the current regulatory dissonance. It explores the fundamental tension between the clinical duty of beneficence and the patient’s right to bodily integrity, specifically addressing the tension between the statutory duty of candour and clinical strategies predicated on concealment. By distinguishing between the physiological risks of overt coercion and the 'quiet deception' of CM, the paper rebuts deontological claims that CM constitutes an irreconcilable violation of rights. Instead, applying a rule-utilitarian framework, it argues that CM is a benevolent necessity when used to prevent certain physiological harm and preserve residual dignity. Furthermore, the article analyses judicial responses, integrating recent precedents such as Re A [2022] and An NHS Trust v XB [2020], to define a framework of necessity required to legitimise the practice. Ultimately, the paper concludes that while CM carries a significant moral and relational cost, it remains an ethically justifiable measure of last resort within a transparent English and Welsh legal architecture that prioritises accountability and consultation over administrative convenience.

International Journal of Law and PsychiatryVol. 110
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Deception in care giving: legal and ethical complexities in the administration of covert medication — Nicola; id_orcid 0000-0001-6640-337X Glover-Thomas · International Journal of Law and Psychiatry (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS