A doctor has agreed a baby in a "right-to-life" legal row may be able to interact - but any mental development would only make his fate more tragic. The paediatric neurologist told the High Court the severely disabled child, Baby RB, would remain in a "no chance" situation even if he developed further. He questioned the life the boy would lead if he was capable of cognitive function but physically so disabled.
A doctor has said that a baby in a "right-to-life" legal row has the potential to communicate and even operate a wheelchair in years to come. The paediatric neurologist, Professor Fenella Kirkham, told the High Court that Baby RB had the normal intelligence of a one-year-old. She said he was likely to develop language recognition skills and he may be better off at home. The boy's father is fighting an attempt by the hospital to end life support.
A father who had been fighting to stop a hospital withdrawing life support from his seriously ill son has dropped his objections. The one-year-old, known as Baby RB for legal reasons, was born with a rare, genetic muscle condition that makes it hard for him to breathe independently. The hospital was backed by the baby's mother. But the move had been strongly opposed by the child's father at a High Court hearing. However, the father changed his mind after hearing medical evidence which suggested it would be in the best interests of the child if medical support was withdrawn. Lawyers for the health authority caring for the baby in intensive care told Mr Justice McFarlane: "All of the parties in court now agree that it would be in RB's best interests for the course suggested by the doctors to be followed."
A father who went to the High Court to try to stop a hospital turning off his seriously ill baby son's life support machine has dropped his objections to the move. The outcome has prompted a mixture of sadness and relief. For six days they had sat in the bland surroundings of Court 50 at London's High Court listening to others talking about their baby son's quality of life. A host of paediatricians, nurses, and experts went into the witness box. Many of them urged a judge to decide that this profoundly disabled 13-month-old boy should be allowed to die. It was, they said, no longer in his best interests to keep him alive.
Anti-abortion campaigners have won a High Court challenge to clarify government guidelines on abortion in Northern Ireland. The Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child (Spuc) claimed guidance to health professionals was misleading and legally inaccurate. The High Court ruled the Department of Health's guidelines be withdrawn. The court found the guidelines failed to deal properly with counselling and conscientious objection. The judge, Lord Justice Girvan, stopped short of quashing the document issued by the Department of Health in March. Spuc was seeking a declaration that the decision to publish the advice to health professionals was unlawful.
The 44-year-old, a former international consultant, opted to take her daughter, 9, out of the immunisation programme run at her private school because she had reservations about the safety of the vaccine. After spending hours researching it and speaking with friends in the medical profession, she decided that not enough was known about the long-term effects of the vaccine, and that her child, who has no medical problems, should not have it.
Three years ago, Trudy Moore found that her daughter, Samantha, conceived using her husband’s sperm and her sister as a surrogate, was not a genetic match to her husband. Frantic for answers, she confronted her doctor, who suggested in e-mails to Ms. Moore that he may have contaminated her husband’s sample – possibly with 3168.
The United Kingdom’s largest independent abortion provider is mounting a High Court challenge to make it possible for women to complete early stage abortions at home. BPAS, formerly known as the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, is asking the court to rule that the 1967 Abortion Act allows women to take the second dose of tablets for an early medical abortion at home. The act says that any treatment for the termination of pregnancy has to be carried out at a hospital or clinic. Early medical abortion, available in the first nine weeks of pregnancy, requires women to take two sets of treatment, mifepristone and misoprostol, 24 to 48 hours apart. Currently in the UK this means two visits to a hospital or clinic.
A controversial court that still holds its hearing in private will decide tomorrow whether a pregnant woman with learning difficulties should be forcibly sterilised once she gives birth. Health workers from a local NHS trust and council, who cannot be named for legal reasons, have asked the secretive Court of Protection to decide whether the woman should be forced to have her fallopian tubes cut to stop her falling pregnant again.
The order by Mr Justice Baker was issued in a case involving a woman, who can be referred to only as "M". She has been in "a minimally conscious state" since suffering from swelling of the brain stem, which caused serious damage and wasting to the brain. The woman suffered the illness in 2003, when she was 43, and has been minimally conscious since then.
A mother is seeking a court's permission to withdraw life-sustaining artificial nutrition and hydration from her brain-damaged daughter. The woman, 53, who can only be referred to as "M" for legal reasons, is in a "minimally conscious state".
Doctors have the right and the ethical responsibility to pull patients off life support if they decide treatment is futile – and should not need patient or family consent to do so, lawyers for two doctors at Toronto’s Sunnybrook Hospital will argue in Ontario’s highest court. The Court of Appeal’s decision will not only determine the fate of a man who has been comatose in a Toronto hospital for most of the time since he moved to Canada from Iran, it could have wide-ranging implications for the ability of patients to determine the course of their treatment and the right of medical professionals to make those decisions.
A 22-stone ex-policeman has lost his Court of Appeal fight to force a health authority to fund obesity surgery. Tom Condliff, 62, said he needed a gastric bypass operation to save his life after becoming obese due to the drugs he takes for long-term diabetes. The Stoke-on-Trent man challenged a decision by North Staffordshire PCT to refuse to fund the procedure. Court judges expressed "considerable sympathy" but ruled the funding policy did not breach human rights laws. Lord Justice Toulson, one of three judges sitting on Wednesday, said: "Anyone in his situation would feel desperate." Mr Condliff, of Talke, who has a body mass index (BMI) of 43 - not high enough under his PCT's rules to qualify for surgery - lost a High Court battle over the decision in April. But his lawyers had argued the PCT had applied a funding policy which was legally flawed and breached his human rights.
The B.C. Civil Liberties Association says it wants to challenge Canada's assisted-suicide laws alone. The BCCLA represents four plaintiffs seeking to change Canada's assisted-suicide laws, including a dying woman who won the right to have her trial expedited because her health is failing. Gloria Taylor suffers from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, also known as Lou Gehrig's disease. On Wednesday, a B.C. Supreme Court judge ruled Taylor's trial should be heard in November because of the woman's rapidly deteriorating condition. A similar lawsuit is simultaneously being brought forward by the Farewell Foundation. The group's co-founder Russell Ogden is lobbying to join the BCCLA's lawsuit if its own challenge is struck down. Ogden argues testimony from his application should be part of the civil liberties association's case because it's unfair to assess the quality of either challenge.
Days after an Israeli court made a landmark ruling allowing the family of a deceased 17-year-old girl to harvest and freeze the eggs from her ovaries, the family has apparently bowed to domestic pressure to drop efforts to push ahead with the procedure. The family of Chen Aida Ayish, who was gravely injured in a car crash 10 days ago, had appealed to the court to extract her eggs after doctors declared her brain dead, Israeli media had reported. The court's ruling was unprecedented in Israel, and possibly globally, but immediately sparked a backlash from religiously conservative communities in Israel, a source familiar with the case said yesterday, prompting the family not to take the case any further. Ms Ayish, 17, fell into a coma after she was hit by a car 10 days ago. Doctors at the Kfar Saba hospital pronounced her brain dead last Wednesday, and her parents decided to donate her organs, and probe the possibility of harvesting her eggs.