Gaby Parker and Celia Kitzinger, 30th October 2021 A man in his 40s (PH) has bronchiectasis. Last night his oxygen levels became seriously low (79%) and doctors raised with him the possibility of transfer to the intensive care unit, or to high dependency care. He refused to go. He’s made it unambiguously clear that he’ll consent toContinue reading “Capacity to refuse intensive care”
At the end of the hearing, in her closing summary, Emma Sutton acknowledged that it was a “finely balanced” decision but came down on the side that amputation was NOT in her best interests – most especially as it went counter not only to her current wishes and feelings, but also to her clearly expressed capacitous decisions as recently as last year.
“…The judgment for this hearing will be handed down within the next week. If AB is found to have capacity by Mrs Justice Roberts, this will be the first case in England and Wales since 2012 in which a patient with severe and enduring anorexia nervosa is found to have capacity to make her own decisions about nutrition…”
“Yesterday I bore witness. I cannot think of an opening statement to articulate the experience better…”
“…The position taken by the Official Solicitor (OS) meant that the Local Authority (the applicant), the NHS Trust (the second respondent) and the OS (the first respondent) all took exactly the same position – all opposed to P’s wishes. It felt very one-sided and as though nobody was arguing for what P wanted, except for P herself…”
“…I hope Mr A’s hunger strike works to shame the Home Office into respecting his identity – but if it does not, I would like him to choose to live, if he can bear to. Not because he will have a happy future (although he may), and not for the sake of his parents (although they would rejoice in that decision) but because he has so much to contribute..”
“This is an account of a Court of Protection hearing before Mr Justice Hayden in the case of Re ‘D’ on Friday 19th June 2020. In it I aim to provide an insight into the hearing itself, and — as someone with a keen interest in the law but no legal qualifications — what it was like to observe…”