Orse – In re M (Adult Patient) (Minimally Conscious State: Withdrawal of Treatment)
The case concerned a woman in a minimally conscious state, Baker J expressed the view that ‘all decisions about the proposed withholding or withdrawal of ANH from a person in a persistent vegetative state or minimally conscious state should always be brought to the court.’ Such decisions ‘must’ be referred to court. He considered that ‘the legal position has been clear since the decision in the Bland case’ and, in so far as there was any difference between the Code (which might have suggested that applications to court were not necessary unless the doctor’s assessment of the patient’s best interests was disputed) and the position set out in Practice Direction 9E, it was the Practice Direction which reflected the law.
 EWHC 2443 (Fam),  Fam Law 1330,  Med LR 584,  1 WLR 1653, (2011) 122 BMLR 67,  1 FCR 1, ,  EWHC 2443 (Fam), (2011) 122 BMLR 67,  1 FCR 1,  1 All ER 1313, (2011) 14 CCL Rep 689,  1 FLR 495,  COPLR 222,  PTSR 1040
England and Wales
Cited – An NHS Trust and Others v Y and Another SC 30-Jul-2018
The court was asked whether a court order must always be obtained before clinically assisted nutrition and hydration, which is keeping alive a person with a prolonged disorder of consciousness, can be withdrawn, or whether, in some circumstances, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 September 2021; Ref: scu.444733