Doctors will be allowed forcibly to sedate the 55-year-old woman in her home and take her to hospital for surgery. She could be forced to remain on a ward afterwards. The case has sparked an intense ethical and legal debate. Experts questioned whether lawyers and doctors should be able to override the wishes of patients and whether force was ever justified in providing medical care.
A cancer patient who has a phobia of hospitals should be forced to undergo a life-saving operation if necessary, a High Court judge has ruled. Sir Nicholas Wall, sitting at the Court of Protection, ruled doctors could forcibly sedate the 55-year-old woman - referred to as PS. PS lacked the capacity to make decisions about her health, he said. Doctors at her NHS Foundation trust had argued PS would die if her ovaries and fallopian tubes were not removed. Evidence presented to Sir Nicholas, head of the High Court Family Division, said PS was diagnosed with uterine cancer last year.
BERLIN — In a landmark ruling that will make it easier for people to allow relatives and other loved ones to die, Germany’s highest court ruled Friday that it was not a criminal offense to cut off life-sustaining treatment for a patient. The court overturned the conviction of a lawyer who last year was found guilty of attempted manslaughter for advising a client to sever the intravenous feeding tube that was keeping her mother alive, although in a persistent vegetative state. The mother had told her daughter that she did not wish to be kept alive artificially.
BERLIN — Embryos created during in vitro fertilization can be screened for genetic defects before being implanted in the womb, a German high court said in a landmark ruling Tuesday. The Federal Supreme Court in Leipzig ruled in support of a Berlin gynecologist who had carried out screening on embryos for three different couples and implanted only those that were healthy. The embryos with hereditary genetic defects were left to die off. The high court's ruling upheld a decision by a Berlin state court that the doctor's action did not violate German laws for the protection of embryos. The 47-year-old doctor, who was not identified by the court, brought the case to court himself in 2006 to clarify the legal situation. He was first acquitted by a regional court in Berlin, but the city's state prosecutor appealed.
A decision last week by Germany’s Federal Supreme Court to acquit a gynaecologist of illegal abortion after he chose to carry out genetic diagnosis on several human embryos and discarded those with genetic defects has stirred a debate about the possible need for a new law tightening the rules on preimplantation genetic diagnosis. The landmark ruling said that embryos created from in vitro fertilisation (IVF) can be screened for genetic defects before being implanted in the womb. The 47 year old doctor, who was not identified, brought the case to court himself in 2006 to clarify the legal situation. He had already been acquitted in May 2009 by a regional court in Berlin, but the prosecutor had appealed the decision.
Germany’s highest criminal appeals court has overturned the conviction for attempted manslaughter of a lawyer who advised a woman to cut the intravenous feeding tube keeping her comatose mother alive. In a landmark ruling hailed as a victory by advocates of the right to die, the Federal Court of Justice ruled on 25 June that terminally ill, comatose patients who had previously signalled their opposition to life prolonging treatments have the right to have such treatments stopped. The ruling gives legal cover for what some call "passive" euthanasia of terminally ill patients but is not applicable to the administration of a lethal substance, which remains illegal.
Two children in Northern Ireland whose white mother was mistakenly impregnated with sperm from South Africa labelled “Caucasian (Cape Coloured)” during in vitro fertilisation have failed in a compensation claim at the High Court in Belfast. The children’s mother, who brought the case on their behalf, claimed that their quality of life was adversely affected because they looked markedly different from their parents and had quite different skin colour from each other. She said that they were subject to “abusive and derogatory comment and hurtful name calling from other children, causing emotional upset.” But Mr Justice Gillen ruled that they had not suffered any loss or damage for which the law could compensate them.
Although the number of patients seeking treatment elsewhere in the European Union is small,3 this could easily change, especially if people are faced with growing waiting lists or other forms of rationing as the new groups seek to control their budgets. British residents have had the right to obtain treatment in another EU country since 1971.4 Initially, the opportunities were limited mainly to people who fell ill when abroad or, less often, when the NHS agreed that there were good reasons for patients being treated abroad (for example, a citizen of another country resident here returning home to give birth
OTTAWA — A Supreme Court ruling placing much of Canada's burgeoning fertility industry under provincial control leaves an enormous gap in the regulation of artificial procreation and exposes women who use the technologies and the children born from them to potential harm, critics say. A sharply divided court struck down key federal powers to regulate assisted human reproduction Wednesday, concluding that several parts of a new law fall under provincial jurisdiction over health care. The ruling effectively stops a federal move toward national standards and guts Assisted Human Reproduction Canada — an embattled federal agency that was struck four years ago to monitor how assisted procreation is carried out at more than two dozen fertility clinics across the country.
Women in the Irish Republic will have to be given the means to access legal abortions there if their lives are at risk, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled in a landmark judgment. The ruling, by the grand chamber of the Strasbourg court, can not be appealed and will require Ireland to legislate or otherwise set up a framework to decide whether there is a “real and substantial risk” to a woman’s life if she goes ahead with her pregnancy. The court held that the human rights of a woman with a rare cancer were violated when she was obliged to travel to the United Kingdom for an abortion and awarded her €15 000 (£12 700; $19 800) in compensation.
L’acquittement de l’ancienne médecin cantonale en retenant l’état de nécessité constitue une première en Suisse. Le Ministère public devrait déposer un recours au TF avant la refonte de la législation prévue pour 2011
A patient in Broadmoor Hospital who has spent more than two decades alongside some of Britain's most dangerous criminals has won the right to have a review into his detention heard in public, The Independent has learned. The decision, which is thought to be a legal first, has major implications for the way Mental Health Tribunals function and will open the doors to one of the country's most secretive arbitration systems. The man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, has spent 23 years detained under the Mental Health Act, mostly at Broadmoor Hospital, the high-security facility in Berkshire that houses notorious offenders such as the serial killers Peter Sutcliffe and Robert Napper. He was committed in September 1986 after being convicted on two counts of attempted wounding. Doctors had classified the 52-year-old as having a mental illness and psychopathic disorder, but in September 2008 they changed the diagnosis to just a psychopathic disorder.
A serving High Court judge has told the BBC that he is approving commercial surrogacy agreements made by British couples abroad. Laws in the UK are designed to try to prevent such arrangements, but Mr Justice Hedley said his paramount concern was the welfare of the child. The most recent case the judge approved was last month, involving a baby born to a surrogate in the Ukraine. The judge said he was "extremely anxious" about the current situation. In Britain, the judge said, the only payment allowed to a surrogate mother was one of "reasonable expenses". However, he has agreed to give retrospective approval for commercial surrogacy on at least four occasions.
The High Court has granted a Dublin maternity hospital orders allowing it to perform, if required, an emergency blood transfusion to the unborn child of a Jehovah's Witnesses couple who is at risk of being delivered prematurely. Today the court heard the child's mother, who is approximately 26 weeks pregnant, presented with a spontaneous premature ruptured membrane. Doctors at the hospital treating the woman, who cannot be identified by order of the court, say they can't predict exactly when the child will be delivered but that the likelihood of a premature birth is high. They claim in the event the child is born in the next four to five weeks the infant "most likely will require a transfusion of blood or blood related products in order to safeguard the child's life and prevent it from sustaining serious injury." However the parents, for religious reasons, have refused to give their consent to allow the hospital administer a transfusion to the child.
Parichehr Salasel believed that where there was life, there was hope. Two doctors at Toronto’s Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre disagreed, saying that it is in the best interests of her husband, Hassan Rasouli, who is in a permanent vegetative state, to be taken off life support and provided with palliative care until his death. The seven-month medical conflict over Mr. Rasouli’s fate ended on Wednesday when Ontario’s top court took Ms. Salasel’s side in a ruling that is expected to reignite for Canadians the emotional issue of how to handle end-of-life decisions and whether extraordinary medical interventions save lives or merely prolong dying.