Home care ruling on comatose woman is delayed

THE president of the High Court must decide if a woman in her forties who has been in a vegetative state for some 10 years should continue to be cared for at home, as her family wish, or moved to a nursing home facility as proposed by the HSE.

Providing care in the nursing home is substantially less costly than the existing home care package, the HSE said.

Mr Justice Peter Kelly will also have to decide issues concerning the circumstances in which a Do Not Resuscitate notice should apply, which arose from disagreement between the woman’s parents and HSE.

The issue of future care came about because the woman is a ward of court and a €2.6m settlement secured by her in High Court personal injury proceedings in 2013 – which had funded her home care – has run out.

That settlement, made against the HSE without admission of liability, arose from a claim of delay and negligence in the diagnosis of a brain tumour.

Her parents are anxious to ensure she continues to receive care to the same standard she has received at home.

Yesterday, their counsel told Mr Justice Kelly the parents are anxious the court remains involved and to decide the care issues in her best interests.

Noting the woman’s settlement was calculated by reference to a life expectancy she has now exceeded, the judge said that seemed to be a result of the “quite superb” care she has at home in a regime instituted by her family and involving a very committed GP, consultants and regime of nursing that was “second to none”.

The HSE said care should be provided in a nursing home that will cost less and is appropriate, he said.

The family disagreed due to past experiences, he noted.

His task was to decide, on the medical evidence, what is in the woman’s best interests. If he decides home care should continue, the issue of funding that would then have to be decided.

Mr Justice Kelly adjourned the matter for three weeks.

€2.6m settlement secured to fund her care has run out