"M": the ethics and treatment of vulnerable adults

Judgment was  handed down on 28 September 2011 in the case of ‘M’, an adult woman whose mother petitioned, unsuccessfully, for the Court to allow her to die, even though she is not in a vegetative state.

This is the first time that the Court has been asked to deal with the issues surrounding someone who is in a minimally conscious state ("MCS"). This case puts in the spotlight once again the ethics of the withdrawal of treatment from children and vulnerable adults. The struggle between a patient’s family and the medical team assigned to the case is often heart-breaking.

Not only is there a challenge in balancing the rights of the patient’s family with the views of the medical professionals, but also there is a significant challenge in balancing rights when it comes to media coverage of these cases: on the one hand the right to respect for private and family life; on the other, the public’s right to know how these complex ethical issues are being decided.

In an article written for the Times  following the judgment , Leslie Keegan, a barrister at 7 Bedford Row and former neurophysiologist who has acted in cases involving the withdrawal of treatment for children examined the legal and ethical issues. You can read Leslie's article here.