Parents of disabled baby lose appeal against court order
http://www.100md.com
《英国医生杂志》
The parents of a severely disabled baby girl have lost their appeal against a court order allowing doctors not to resuscitate her in the case of respiratory arrest.
Darren and Debbie Wyatt took the case of their 22 month old daughter, Charlotte, to the Court of Appeal last week in an attempt to overturn last October's High Court decision. This decision entitled doctors at St Mary's Hospital, Portsmouth, not to ventilate her if she stopped breathing.
Mr Justice Hedley accepted the argument of Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust that resuscitating Charlotte would be "pointless and possibly inhumane," given the condition of her lungs.
Charlotte Wyatt was born three months prematurely, weighing less than 500 g and with severe damage to her kidneys, lungs, and brain. At the time of that ruling she was unable to survive outside an oxygen head box, supplying 95% oxygen. Her doctors gave her only a 5% chance of surviving the winter.
Charlotte Wyatt's mother, Debbie, who is expecting another baby
Credit: CARL DE SOUZA/AFP/GETTY
But all parties agree that Charlotte's condition has since improved. She now spends a few hours each day out of the head box, breathing a 40% oxygen mix through nasal tubes.
A recent letter from the hospital to her parents described her progress as "remarkable," although doctors insisted that her underlying condition had not improved.
"The consequences of her getting an infection are unchanged," said David Lock, acting for the trust. "She will still suffer terrible indignity and pain if ventilated."
"This is not a case about disability," he told the court. "This is a case about the balance between the benefits a treatment will deliver, if any, and the injury, the pain, and the downsides of inflicting that treatment."
But David Wolfe, acting for the parents, said: "The doctors should not have in their back pocket an open consent from the court to let Charlotte die regardless of the circumstances at the time and regardless of the views of her parents."
In rejecting the appeal Lords Justices Laws, Wall, and Lloyd said that Mr Justice Hedley had "made no error of law" last October, but they ordered that a review of her condition, originally set for this autumn, be brought forward to the earliest possible date.(Owen Dyer)
Darren and Debbie Wyatt took the case of their 22 month old daughter, Charlotte, to the Court of Appeal last week in an attempt to overturn last October's High Court decision. This decision entitled doctors at St Mary's Hospital, Portsmouth, not to ventilate her if she stopped breathing.
Mr Justice Hedley accepted the argument of Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust that resuscitating Charlotte would be "pointless and possibly inhumane," given the condition of her lungs.
Charlotte Wyatt was born three months prematurely, weighing less than 500 g and with severe damage to her kidneys, lungs, and brain. At the time of that ruling she was unable to survive outside an oxygen head box, supplying 95% oxygen. Her doctors gave her only a 5% chance of surviving the winter.
Charlotte Wyatt's mother, Debbie, who is expecting another baby
Credit: CARL DE SOUZA/AFP/GETTY
But all parties agree that Charlotte's condition has since improved. She now spends a few hours each day out of the head box, breathing a 40% oxygen mix through nasal tubes.
A recent letter from the hospital to her parents described her progress as "remarkable," although doctors insisted that her underlying condition had not improved.
"The consequences of her getting an infection are unchanged," said David Lock, acting for the trust. "She will still suffer terrible indignity and pain if ventilated."
"This is not a case about disability," he told the court. "This is a case about the balance between the benefits a treatment will deliver, if any, and the injury, the pain, and the downsides of inflicting that treatment."
But David Wolfe, acting for the parents, said: "The doctors should not have in their back pocket an open consent from the court to let Charlotte die regardless of the circumstances at the time and regardless of the views of her parents."
In rejecting the appeal Lords Justices Laws, Wall, and Lloyd said that Mr Justice Hedley had "made no error of law" last October, but they ordered that a review of her condition, originally set for this autumn, be brought forward to the earliest possible date.(Owen Dyer)