Holly.gif

Information for "SS v CCG (2018) EWCOP 40"

Basic information

Display titleSS v CCG [2018] EWCOP 40
Default sort keySS v CCG (2018) EWCOP 40
Page length (in bytes)1,968
Page ID10061
Page content languageen - English
Page content modelwikitext
Indexing by robotsAllowed
Number of redirects to this page0

Page protection

EditAllow only users with "editing" permission (infinite)
MoveAllow only users with "editing" permission (infinite)
View the protection log for this page.

Edit history

Page creatorJonathan (talk | contribs)
Date of page creation21:43, 20 March 2019
Latest editorJonathan (talk | contribs)
Date of latest edit21:59, 25 April 2021
Total number of edits3
Total number of distinct authors1
Recent number of edits (within past 90 days)0
Recent number of distinct authors0

Page properties

Hidden categories (3)

This page is a member of 3 hidden categories:

Transcluded templates (11)

Templates used on this page:

SEO properties

Description

Content

Article description: (description)
This attribute controls the content of the description and og:description elements.
"The application seeks a declaration pursuant to section 15 (that it is lawful and in B's best interests for CANH to be withdrawn) and, secondly, an order pursuant to section 16 for such withdrawal and for B to receive palliative care only. If granted, it is anticipated that B will pass away. ... In support of granting the application there are a number of important factors. It is consistent with her previously expressed feelings and wishes. It supports her right, I suspect strongly held, to self-determination. She has no quality of life. Therapeutically, her life is futile, there is no hope of recovery. There is no hope. If I allow the application and make the declarations, it will bring to an end the invasive and, in my judgment, burdensome medical treatment from which she, B, obtains no benefit. It is consistent with her Muslim religion. It is consistent with her devoted husband's views of his wife's best interests. It is consistent with the unanimous views of those that are responsible for caring and treating her, whether it be the clinical or the support team. Is there any factor which weighs in the scales against granting the application? There is. It is the powerful principle that if I make the declarations, it will inevitably lead to B's death, so offends against the very strong principle of the sanctity of life. Having taken time to consider the matter, it seems to me clear that the direction of travel is all one way. It is with my very greatest sympathy to the family and B's husband in particular that balance falls very clearly in favour of me granting the application and making the declarations as sought, and I do so."
Information from Extension:WikiSEO