Court eases rules on ending lives of people in vegetative state

THE Supreme Court yesterday ruled that families will no longer have to seek legal permission to end the lives of people in a vegetative state.

The UK’S highest court upheld a ruling that a man with an extensive brain injury should be allowed to die without the family having to go before a judge at the Court of Protection. The ruling means that – when doctors and families are in agreement – it will now be easier to withdraw food and liquid to allow such patients to die.

Lady Black said an agreement between families and doctors was sufficient safeguarding to ensure “public confidence”. But she urged families to apply to court “where there are differences of view” between relatives or medical professionals.

The case was brought before the Supreme Court after a 52-year-old financial analyst, identified as Mr Y, was in a prolonged disorder of consciousness after suffering a cardiac arrest in 2017.

His family and his doctors agreed it would be in his best interests to allow him to die by withdrawing his feeding tube. The NHS trust asked the High Court to declare that it was not necessary to apply to the Court of Protection for a decision when the doctors and the family all believe it is in the patient’s best interests.

The judge agreed, but the Official Solicitor, who represents people who lack capacity, appealed on behalf of Mr Y.

Mr Y died in December, but it was decided that the appeal before five Supreme Court justices should proceed because of the general importance of the issues raised.

Yesterday the justices unanimously dismissed the appeal. But Lady Black emphasised that there would be cases in which an application would be required – or desirable.

Natalie Koussa, from Compassion in Dying, welcomed the decision, which she said acknowledged that sometimes “it is in someone’s best interests to withdraw treatment”.