The Applicant NHS Trust was seeking a declaration that it was in the P's best interests to re-insert a PEG tube which had fallen out. The declaration was made.
The Applicant NHS Trust was seeking a declaration that it was in the P's best interests to re-insert the PEG tube which had fallen out. The Official Solicitor supported the application but the P's daughter, opposed it. She said that it was not in his best interests to have the PEG re-inserted or to continue to have CANH. She went further, contending that it is not in the P's interests to receive any active treatment, including antibiotics, or even blood tests for the purpose of monitoring and investigation, and that it was in his best interests to be placed back on an end of life pathway as he briefly was overnight on 28th and 29th October 2020.
The court agreed with the Trust and OS. The active treatment and proposed reinsertion of the PEG tube would not constitute aggressive treatment, it would interfere only very modestly with his bodily integrity, it carried an extremely low risk of complications and it was highly likely to succeed in returning him to the condition he was in until 9 October 2020. The P showed no indication of wishing to die and as Mostyn J had previously found, any past views he expressed about not wishing to be a "body in a bed" did not apply to his current condition which was of a man who, notwithstanding his grossly restricted existence, could take pleasure and stimulation from activities, culture, and human interaction.
Read the full text of the judgment on Bailii
Case summaries on every Court of Protection case & other relevant decisions with links to the full judgment where available.
Support the Hub
This site is free to access but if you find it useful then please consider a contribution by way of support for our work. Click here to contribute.
Sign up for our free email alert
We do not share your details with any third parties and you can unsubscribe at any time
More from Bath Publishing