header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Game of life

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
04 July 2014 / Charles Foster
Issue: 7613 / Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail
comment_foster

Advance decisions for incapacitous patients haven’t been let in through the back door, says Charles Foster

What do you do when it’s obvious that an incapacitous patient would, had they capacity, refuse life-sustaining treatment? Can it be said that it is nonetheless in their best interests to have the treatment?

No, said Hayden J, in a recent judgment in the Court of Protection: Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v TH and TR [2014] EWCOP 4, [2014] All ER (D) 209 (May).

TH was 52, and in a minimally conscious state. Although there was no definitive determination of the medical facts (that determination was adjourned), the prognosis seemed to be poor. At best, it seemed, there might be a small increase in the level of consciousness—and even that was rather unlikely. He was, and would remain, legally incapacitous.

Should life-sustaining treatment be given?

It is important to translate that question into the language used by Lady Hale in Aintree University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust v James [2013] UKSC 67, [2014] 1 All ER 573.

Would

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: The insider returns
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
NLJ this week: Drawing the line on contempt
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
NLJ this week: Stop and search by the numbers
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
NLJ this week: Looking back on the prorogation that never was
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
NLJ this week: How not to plead a schedule of loss
A construction defect claim in the Court of Appeal offers a sharp lesson in pleading discipline. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains how a catastrophically drafted schedule of loss derailed otherwise viable claims. Across the areas explored in this week's column, the message is consistent: clarity, economy and proper pleading matter more than ever
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll