Re CW; A Primary Care Trust v CW (2010) EWHC 3448 (COP): Difference between revisions
(Created page with "''(1) Medical treatment is of no benefit to a person in a persistent vegetative state because they are not sentient and have no prospect of recovery; whether the withdrawal of li...") |
|||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
''(1) Medical treatment is of no benefit to a person in a persistent vegetative state because | ''(1) Medical treatment is of no benefit to a person in a persistent vegetative state because he is not sentient and has no prospect of recovery; whether the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment measures is in P's best interests depends on whether the diagnosis of PVS is correct; if it is correct then the provision of any treatment is futile and cannot be in his best interests. (2) CW was in a persistent vegetative state with no prospect of recovery; it was in his best interests for artificial nutrition and hydration to be withheld, which could be done lawfully; it was in his best interests to receive treatment and nursing care to ensure that he retains the greatest dignity possible until death.'' | ||
==Other== | ==Other== | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
(1) A Primary Care Trust (2) An NHS Trust v (1) Mr CW by his Litigation Friend The Official Solicitor) (2) HW (Mother) (3) PW (Father) (4) AW (Brother) (5) EW (Sister) | (1) A Primary Care Trust (2) An NHS Trust v (1) Mr CW by his Litigation Friend The Official Solicitor) (2) HW (Mother) (3) PW (Father) (4) AW (Brother) (5) EW (Sister) | ||
==External | ==External links== | ||
{{bailii | {{#bailii:(2010) EWHC 3448 (COP)|no}} | ||
[[Media:Re CW; A Primary Care Trust v CW (2010) EWHC 3448 (COP).doc|Transcript]] | |||
[[Category:Judgment available on MHLO]] | |||
[[Category:Best interests]] | [[Category:Best interests]] | ||
[[Category:Brief summary]] | [[Category:Brief summary]] | ||
[[Category:Transcript]] | [[Category:Transcript]] | ||
[[Category:2011 cases]] | [[Category:2011 cases]] | ||
Latest revision as of 20:07, 28 May 2020
(1) Medical treatment is of no benefit to a person in a persistent vegetative state because he is not sentient and has no prospect of recovery; whether the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment measures is in P's best interests depends on whether the diagnosis of PVS is correct; if it is correct then the provision of any treatment is futile and cannot be in his best interests. (2) CW was in a persistent vegetative state with no prospect of recovery; it was in his best interests for artificial nutrition and hydration to be withheld, which could be done lawfully; it was in his best interests to receive treatment and nursing care to ensure that he retains the greatest dignity possible until death.
Other
Before: Ryder J
Hearing and judgment: 17/11/10
Ms Nageena Khalique (instructed by Mills and Reeve) for the Applicants
Miss Harry Thomas QC (instructed by The Official Solicitor) for First Respondent
Miss Bridget Dolan (instructed by Anthony Collins Solicitors) for the Second Respondent
The Third, Fourth and Fifth Respondents were in attendance via video link
Citations
COP No: 11500872
The transcript front sheet calls the case "Re C".
(1) A Primary Care Trust (2) An NHS Trust v (1) Mr CW by his Litigation Friend The Official Solicitor) (2) HW (Mother) (3) PW (Father) (4) AW (Brother) (5) EW (Sister)
External links
Possible Bailii link (not there when checked last night, but might have appeared since)