Fact-finding, ‘magnetic importance’, and the consternation of colleagues: A final hearing adjourned

At the heart of this hearing is the question of whether P can live with her mother, who loves her and wants to care for her. Attempts to elicit P’s wishes and feelings have been unsuccessful, but the social worker has said that “having observed the loving and affectionate relationship that [P] has with her family and that she has been cared for by them throughout her life, it is understood that [P] would wish to continue to stay with her family and be cared for by them”.

A life-sustaining treatment decision from Hayden J in the Court of Appeal

Having witnessed a loving and dedicated family rally to their mother/sister’s cause at the previous hearings, I was not surprised to learn that they had brought an appeal against Hayden J’s order that it will not be in AH’s best interests, and not lawful, for ventilatory treatment to continue after 31st October 2021.

“Burdensome and futile” treatment and dignity compromised: Poor practice at a leading UK hospital

The RHN clearly failed to provide high-quality, patient centred care – and part of this Court of Protection judgment is dedicated to exploring why this happened and what lessons might be learned. 

C-section and anaesthesia: An unexpected unified decision

There had been two major changes in the situation since the first hearing a week ago. Firstly, SM’s baby was now in the breech position. Secondly, as expressed by Mr Justice Holman, the Trust was now “not necessarily resistant to doing some form of spinal anaesthesia on the day if that is her express preference and she is cooperative”. 

Does P have capacity to consent to sale of a house and move to residential care?

By Celia Kitzinger, 11th November 2021 Editorial update: Some of the ‘facts’ conveyed in this hearing turned out later not to be true. Check out the subsequent hearing in this case which corrects some of the ‘facts’ reported here: “Approving a conveyancing plan to move P to residential care“ “I have concerns over a wholeContinue reading “Does P have capacity to consent to sale of a house and move to residential care?”

Navigating a family feud on P’s death-bed

By Celia Kitzinger, 9th November 2021 She’s in her eighties, with significant cognitive decline,  and delirium secondary to numerous infections and “in all likelihood in the last weeks of her life,” said the judge.  She lacks capacity to make her own decisions about who she has contact with. One of her daughters, Ann[1], and Ann’s daughter (P’sContinue reading “Navigating a family feud on P’s death-bed”

Reflections on Disability and Reproductive Justice in a court hearing

P’s awake while giving birth, adding layers of complexity to what could be considered P’s best interests because she raised the importance to her of bonding and the symbiotic relationship between mother and baby. To her, being awake and with her partner are fundamental to establishing that relationship. Without her ability to participate, how could the court have recognised this? 

C-section and general anaesthesia against her wishes? Capacity and best interests

Mr Justice Hayden is well-known (and celebrated) for his robust defence of autonomy and self-determination.  And yet in this instance I got the impression that, faced with a decision about a pregnant woman, his protective instincts had (temporarily) overwhelmed him. I am relieved that he adjourned the hearing rather than precipitously (in my view) declaring SM to lack capacity and making a premature decision about her best interests.

Capacity to refuse intensive care

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”

A judicial U-turn? From ‘no contact’ to ‘main carer’

At an emergency hearing on 24th September 2021, His Honour Judge Tindal issued an injunction against Miss F preventing her from having any contact with Mr G (Case 13382192). At the hearing I attended on 21st October 2021, not only was the injunction made in September lifted, but the court encouraged Miss F to have as much contact with Mr G as possible.