Publication
Indi Gregory: A Wider Perspective on Children's Best Interests at the End-of-life
De Sabbata K, Pearson A · Med Law Rev · 2024
Extract I. INTRODUCTION The case of Indi Gregory is the last of a series of high-profile judgments regarding the end-of-life for terminally ill children. Such cases have typically generated wide controversy among scholars, practitioners, the general public, and the media.1 In almost all of them,2 judges have ordered the withdrawal of the child’s life-prolonging treatment despite strong objections by the parents, often deeply religious people. In judging such cases the courts have consistently applied the principle of the ‘best Interests of the child’. Consolidated case law affirms that the child’s best interests should be established balancing considerations regarding what can be achieved by the proposed treatment, the treatment’s invasive nature and side effects, and the child’s (resulting) quality of life.3 There is a strong presumption in favour of life preservation, but it is not irrebuttable.4 In line with the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment in Aintree v James,5 case law recognises that these questions must be approached from the patient’s assumed point of view,6 that best interests go beyond just medical interests,7 and the parents’ opinions have particular value, though one has to consider their views might be clouded by emotions.8 However, parents tend to lose in court when they do not agree with the doctors.
Synced from the TRENDS in Pediatric Palliative Care Zotero library, curated by The Siden Research Team. ICPCN does not host or verify the full text.