High court judge deliberates ruling on child with severe brain damage
|
Version 0 of 1. A high court judge is considering whether a little boy with brain damage should be taken off a life-support machine after the youngster’s father told her that no-one had the right to “take away the privilege of life from him”. Specialists have told Ms Justice Russell that the youngster – who turned one earlier this year – has suffered “profound irreversible brain damage”. They say it is in the youngster’s best interests for “life-sustaining intensive care” including “mechanical ventilation” to be withdrawn“. But his parents disagree. Russell analysed the case at a hearing in the family division of the high court in London on Monday after an application by the NHS foundation trust which runs the hospital where the youngster is being cared for. The judge, who heard evidence from the little boy’s mother and father, said she would deliver her ruling on Tuesday. A lawyer representing the NHS trust told the judge that the little boy had been born prematurely by emergency Caesarean section in “poor condition”. Claire Watson said he had required resuscitation and ventilation at birth. Watson said in late 2013 he had suffered an “acute cardio-respiratory deterioration” which required him to be “mechanically ventilated once again”. She said he was “ventilator dependent” and his condition had not improved despite “on-going intensive care”. And she said specialists thought that the withdrawal of life-supporting intensive care was in the little boy’s best interests. Watson also indicated that something had “gone wrong” and said a “serious untoward investigation” had been carried out but she gave no detail. She told the judge: “The trust have endeavoured to be entirely transparent about what has gone wrong.” Russell said she accepted that the trust had been “transparent” and “has not tried to cover anything up”. But the judge said what had happened had “affected the way his parents feel about his treatment – as it would”. Russell imposed restrictions on how much detail of the case could be reported. The judge ruled that the little boy and his parents could not be identified. She also ruled that the trust could not be identified – after Watson said identifying the trust might lead to the little boy being identified. But the boy’s parents said they wanted the trust to be identified. Russell said she would re-consider whether the trust could be identified tomorrow. The boy’s mother told Russell: “At the end of the day he is still alive. The ventilator is helping and supporting that life. Where there is life I don’t think you should get the right to determine whether that should be taken away.” She said she had seen her son’s eyes move and added: “We believe that (he) does respond to us as parents. We don’t feel that the trust has the right to end his life because he has got brain damage.” The mother said she believed that her son might recover to the point where he could experience “pleasures of life”. “He is still alive,” she told the judge. “Miracles do happen.” |