18 November 2011 / Andrew Parsons

Issue: 7490 / Categories: Features , Public , Mental health

printer

mail-detail

In the balance?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Andrew Parsons deliberates over the court’s approach to the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment

Although it has been known for some time that an application may be made to the court of protection to authorise the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment from a patient in a vegetative state (VS) a recent case, Re M [2011] EWHC 2443 (Fam), [2011] All ER (D) 142 (Sep) has looked at the rather more difficult question of when this should be withdrawn from a patient whose condition was not so acute as to amount to a VS, albeit the quality of life was limited. It was argued that there is a difference between VS and minimally conscious state (MCS) cases. In VS cases, the balance falls in one direction in favour of withdrawal. In MCS cases, it depends on the facts, and, in assessing best interests, the court must follow a balance sheet approach.

Irreparable brain damage

The patient, M, fell into a coma in 2003 aged 43 as a result of viral encephalitis which caused extensive and irreparable brain damage. She was left in a MCS. This

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content

If you are already a subscriber sign in

...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

In the balance?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Andrew Parsons deliberates over the court’s approach to the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment

Although it has been known for some time that an application may be made to the court of protection to authorise the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment from a patient in a vegetative state (VS) a recent case, Re M [2011] EWHC 2443 (Fam), [2011] All ER (D) 142 (Sep) has looked at the rather more difficult question of when this should be withdrawn from a patient whose condition was not so acute as to amount to a VS, albeit the quality of life was limited. It was argued that there is a difference between VS and minimally conscious state (MCS) cases. In VS cases, the balance falls in one direction in favour of withdrawal. In MCS cases, it depends on the facts, and, in assessing best interests, the court must follow a balance sheet approach.

Irreparable brain damage

The patient, M, fell into a coma in 2003 aged 43 as a result of viral encephalitis which caused extensive and irreparable brain damage. She was left in a MCS. This

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content

If you are already a subscriber sign in

...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

SourceURL:

Links:

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

Legal notice: Notice under the Trustee Act 1925

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

Emergency lawyers on call as international regulatory actions soar

Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies

NLJ this week: Employment law’s fine margins

From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act

NLJ this week: Promises broken on non-molestation orders?

Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection

NLJ this week: Assisted dying under the legal microscope

Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961

back-to-top-scroll