Supreme Court ruling ‘risks bringing in euthanasia by the back door’ | DisabledGo News and Blog


Disabled campaigners have warned that a Supreme Court ruling has removed a vital safeguard that protected the lives of brain-damaged patients who have been left unconscious.

The Supreme Court ruled this week that families and doctors will no longer have to seek a court order if they agree to end the life of a patient with a “prolonged disorder of consciousness” (PDOC)* by withdrawing food and fluids.

The court had been hearing the case of a man, Y, who never regained consciousness after a heart attack left him severely brain-damaged and in a permanent vegetative state (PVS).

Y had to be kept alive with water and liquid nutrition, but his family and doctors agreed that it was in his best interests for this to be withdrawn so he could be left to die.

The NHS trust that was treating him sought a declaration from the courts that they could do so without an order from the Court of Protection.

This was granted by the high court, but the official solicitor appealed to the Supreme Court, which this week unanimously dismissed the appeal.

Disabled campaigners have raised grave concerns about the judgment.

 

Source: Supreme Court ruling ‘risks bringing in euthanasia by the back door’ | DisabledGo News and Blog

3 thoughts on “Supreme Court ruling ‘risks bringing in euthanasia by the back door’ | DisabledGo News and Blog

  1. The fact that the family asked for it is worrying with so much greed in the world and so much more money, saw this in care homes in the early 90’s and now its worst. Also doctors do not and should never play at being God and HAVE THAT SO-CALLED POWER ,,, Amen 🙏’s For the World

    Liked by 1 person

  2. It is alaways worrying when familiesrequest for support for their loved one to be withdrawn for it is reasonable to question their judgement and have they anything to gain.

    But that is not so for the medical profession, however, it is not new for the medical profession to instigate such requests for a number of reasons, mainly they, in their wisdom can see no sensible reason to maintain life, as they will have undertaken all reasonable steps.

    However, cn the familiy ever be sure of that, for some in the medical profession have done so for their own gain, Shipman for one. But gain comes in many forms and may not always of a monetry nature, they may wish to publicity or have some force within them to wish to see their power over life and death.

    It is not new that the medical profession have undertaken such exercises as they have done so for many years, there was the Liverpool Pahway and before that other practices and there will still be practices today.

    For they may just take the decision on a health funding basis and in many aspects the health professionals do stick together.

    It could be said if a doctor puts this forward who are we to question their professional code of conduct.

    It would be good if there was openness, honesty and transparancy within health and many other bodies, but will this ever be achieved, I fear not, as the professionals do not take kindly to be questioned, their power is there and is used as and when they wish.

    It should not be so, but I have witnessed many such occasions, some in respect of my own family, which have effected myself greatly.

    I believe we should all be open to question as this would achieve more trust and a better quality service for all concerned.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.