Brain-damaged woman should not be allowed to die, high court rules

Relatives lose bid to withdraw life-supporting treatment from woman known as M, who is in a minimally-conscious state A brain-damaged, minimally-conscious woman should not be allowed to die, a high court judge has ruled. The case is thought to be the first time that a judge has been asked to rule on whether life-supporting treatment should be withdrawn from a person who is not in a persistent vegetative state but is minimally conscious. Mr Justice Baker, who heard legal argument during a court of protection hearing in London in July, described the case as unique and said it raised “very important issues of principle”. Relatives wanted life-supporting treatment withdrawn and said the woman, who turned 52 earlier this month, would not want to live “a life dependent on others”. But a lawyer appointed by the high court to represent the woman opposed the relatives’ application for nutrition to be withdrawn – arguing that she is “otherwise clinically stable”. The local health authority responsible for commissioning her care also opposed the relatives’ application and said the woman’s life was “not without positive elements”. Baker heard that the woman, who cannot be identified for legal reasons and was referred to as M in court, suffered profound brain damage in early 2003 after being diagnosed with viral encephalitis. She was in a coma for several weeks and had been thought to be in a persistent vegetative state. Doctors later concluded that she was in a minimally-conscious state – just above a persistent vegetative state. Health guardian.co.uk

Posted by on September 28, 2011. Filed under News, Politics, World News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.