The courts can not intervene between a parent and her child’s doctors to control future medical care of the child. Such decisions must be made as they presented themselves. In such cases the child’s best interests took precedence over strict legalistic procedures. The court has power to give appropriate remedies even though an incorrect procedures may have been followed. The general rule is that Declarations should be sought and considered in the light of circumstances as they are and not as they may be. Any departure from that approach would have to be justified.
Judges:
Lord Woolf MR
Citations:
Times 26-Jul-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1914, [1999] 2 FLR 905, [1999] Lloyd’s Rep Med 367, [1999] 3 FCR 145, (1999) 11 Admin LR 991, (1999) 50 BMLR 269, [1999] Fam Law 696
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Regina v Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust ex parte Glass Admn 22-Apr-1999
Application with regard to continuation or otherwise of life saving treatment for a child. . .
Cited by:
Cited – Wyatt v Portsmouth NHS Trust and Another FD 21-Apr-2005
Charlotte Wyatt had been born very premature and so severely disabled that her doctors sought and obtained an order that she should not be revived if she died. She had survived several months longer than expected and her parents had noticed . .
Appeal from – Glass v The United Kingdom ECHR 9-Mar-2004
The applicant’s adult son was disabled. There was a disagreement with the hospital about his care. The hospital considered that to alleviate his distress, he should not be resuscitated. The family wanted to take him home, fearing euthanasia. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Health, Children
Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.146829