Jonathan Herring considers a tragic case concerning the right to withhold invasive medical treatment
- Disputes over medical treatment of sick children must be decided on the best interests principle.
- The right to life does not require patients to be given treatment which is not in the best interests to be kept alive.
A v MC (Care Proceedings) [2017] EWHC 370 (Fam) was one of those heart-breaking cases involving a seriously ill child. C was 13 and had multiple, significant disabilities. He had a limited life expectancy. The NHS Trust sought a declaration that it was lawful to withhold invasive treatment. His mother opposed the declaration.
C had severe four limb involvement spastic quadriplegia with athetoid cerebral palsy, global developmental delay, no vocal communication, curvature of the spine, epilepsy, very limited swallowing reflex, and respiratory problems. His lungs were damaged by previous infections and he was he suffered chronic malnourishment. He did not have mental capacity to be involved in decisions about his care. C lived with his mother and had very occasional contact with his father, who played no part
