Judge approves forced Caesarean for mentally-ill woman Doctors have been granted permission to perform an urgent Caesarean section on a mentally-ill woman with diabetes. High Court judge Mr Justice Hayden gave specialists at the Royal Free London NHS Trust approval after a five-hour hearing at the Court of Protection. He said the decision was "draconian" but necessary because the mother's life may be in danger. The woman, 32, who is 32 weeks pregnant, was deemed unable to make the decision over how to give birth. The ruling, late on Friday, came after doctors applied for permission to carry out the delivery in order that the patient's "unstable mental state" could be treated. A specialist from the trust told the Court of Protection in London, which specialises in issues relating to the sick and vulnerable, that their priority was "keeping this woman alive".
The Neuromedia Corner aims to share news and stimulate an effective dialogue about the state of the art of neuroscience technologies, their risks and benefits and the associated ethical and social issues. The Neuromedia Corner is an idea of the bid - Brains in Dialogue project.
A therapeutic programme hailed by ministers as a hi-tech, cost-effective solution to Britain's growing problem of depression and anxiety has been widely ignored by the NHS, leaving hundreds of thousands of people without access to treatment. Opposition politicians and charities have accused the government of creating a postcode lottery.
PSYCHOLOGY Cutting Desire A rare condition compels its sufferers to want to amputate, or paralyze, their own healthy limbs. Inside the strange world of what sufferers call Body Integrity Identity Disorder.
The following guidance is for PCTs, local authorities, hospitals and care homes to support them understand and fulfill their statutory obligations under the Mental Capacity Act Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards legislation.
In the Netherlands, euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (PAS) are considered acceptable medical practices in specific circumstances. The majority of cases of euthanasia and PAS involve patients suffering from cancer. However, in 1994 the Dutch Supreme Court in the so-called Chabot-case ruled that “the seriousness of the suffering of the patient does not depend on the cause of the suffering”, thereby rejecting a distinction between physical (or somatic) and mental suffering. This opened the way for further debate about the acceptability of PAS in cases of serious and refractory mental illness. An important objection against offering PAS to mentally ill patients is that this might reinforce loss of hope, and demoralization. Based on an analysis of a reported case, this argument is evaluated. It is argued that offering PAS to a patient with a mental illness who suffers unbearably, enduringly and without prospect of relief does not necessarily imply taking away hope and can be eth...