header-logo header-logo

In whose best interests?

06 September 2018 / Carmel Shachar , David Locke
Issue: 7807 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail
nlj_7807_locke

David Locke & Carmel Shachar consider the impact of globalised medicine on withdrawal of treatment decisions in the UK

  • Is it a reality that developed jurisdictions (other than the UK) permit treatment contrary to the best interests of children simply because either it is the wish of the parents, or because they can pay for it? Or is the real divergence in the applied definition of ‘best interests’?
  • Since it can reasonably be anticipated that these are arguments which will be raised in front of the courts again, it is important that proper scrutiny is given to the assertions.

As a feature of the progressive globalisation of medicine, the recent, heavily litigated, trio of cases involving the withdrawal of treatment from infants (Charlie Gard, Isaiah Haastrup and Alfie Evans) has highlighted what is asserted to be an international cultural, medical and medico-legal divergence in relation to the issues of futility, ‘best interests’ and the parental role in decisions to withdraw treatment from children.

The first instance decision in the Charlie Gard case, Great Ormond

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

DWF—19 appointments

DWF—19 appointments

Belfast team bolstered by three senior hires and 16 further appointments

Cadwalader—Andro Atlaga

Cadwalader—Andro Atlaga

Firm strengthens leveraged finance team with London partner hire

Knights—Ella Dodgson & Rebecca Laffan

Knights—Ella Dodgson & Rebecca Laffan

Double hire marks launch of family team in Leeds

NEWS
Small law firms want to embrace technology but feel lost in a maze of jargon, costs and compliance fears, writes Aisling O’Connell of the Solicitors Regulation Authority in this week's NLJ
The Supreme Court issued a landmark judgment in July that overturned the convictions of Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo, once poster boys of the Libor and Euribor scandal. In NLJ this week, Neil Swift of Peters & Peters considers what the ruling means for financial law enforcement
Charlie Mercer and Astrid Gillam of Stewarts crunch the numbers on civil fraud claims in the English courts, in this week's NLJ. New data shows civil fraud claims rising steadily since 2014, with the King’s Bench Division overtaking the Commercial Court as the forum of choice for lower-value disputes
Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre makes the case for ‘General Practice Pro Bono’—using core legal skills to deliver life-changing support, without the need for niche expertise—in this week's NLJ
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve reports on Haynes v Thomson, the first judicial application of the Supreme Court’s For Women Scotland ruling in a discrimination claim, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll