M v Mrs N [2015] EWCOP 76

Minimally-conscious state It was in the best interests of N, who was in a minimally-conscious state, not to continue to receive clinically assisted nutrition and hydration. The judge concluded that: "Ultimately, I have concluded that her wishes, so thoughtfully presented by her family, coupled with the intrusive nature of the treatment and its minimal potential to achieve any medical objective, rebut any presumption of continuing to promote life. Quite simply, I have come to the conclusion that it would be disrespectful to Mrs. N to preserve her further in a manner I think she would regard as grotesque."

Essex search

This case's neutral citation number appears in the following newsletters:

• 39 Essex Chambers, 'Mental Capacity Law Newsletter' (issue 61, December 2015)
• 39 Essex Chambers, 'Mental Capacity Law Newsletter' (issue 71, December 2016)
• 39 Essex Chambers, 'Mental Capacity Report' (issue 117, November 2021)
• 39 Essex Chambers, 'Mental Capacity Report' (issue 73, February 2017)
• 39 Essex Chambers, 'Mental Capacity Report' (issue 78, July 2017)

External links

• Browne Jacobson, 'Shift in Mental Capacity law towards a substituted judgment test' (19/11/15)

CASES DATABASE

Full judgment: BAILII

Subject(s):

• Medical treatment cases🔍

Date: 19/11/15🔍

Court: Court of Protection🔍

Judicial history:

• M v Press Association [2016] EWCOP 34
• M v Mrs N [2015] EWCOP 76

Judge(s):

• Hayden🔍

Parties:

• M🔍
• Mrs N🔍
• Bury Clinical Commissioning Group🔍
• A Care Provider🔍

Citation number(s):

• [2015] EWCOP 76^B
• [2015] MHLO 102

What links here:

• M v Press Association [2016] EWCOP 34

Published: 23/11/15 21:41

Cached: 2025-03-31 14:54:23