The president of the High Court has expressed sympathy to the parents of a severely brain-injured young man at the centre of proceedings over whether doctors are entitled not to resuscitate him if his condition further deteriorates.
Mr Justice Peter Kelly said he could not attempt to understand what the parents are going through, but wanted to extended his sympathy concerning their plight as far as he could.
He said he would give them a full opportunity to consider medical evidence in the matter.
The parents disagree with doctors in relation to their son’s ability to communicate, the court heard.
Aged in his 30s, their son has been on a ventilator for four years with a very poor prognosis. His treating doctors say he has irreversible brain injury and they consider that if his condition continues to deteriorate, further interventions will be futile and will only add to his suffering.
Further interventions
The HSE last July initiated proceedings aimed at allowing doctors to decide against further interventions.
Because the man was made a ward of court, the decision on whether doctors will make the final decision about his future treatment rests with the court.
The case is essentially about whether there is a right to withhold treatment considered by treating doctors as futile and not in his best interests.
Doctors also want the court to approve the putting in place of an appropriate care plan to move the man from the hospital high dependency unit (HDU) to an alternative care environment such as another ward or hospice.
His parents, who have taken separate proceedings against the HSE alleging their son’s injuries arose as a result of medical negligence, want to retain the full resuscitation measures available to their son in the HDU and, because of that, they do not want him moved.
Mr Justice Kelly adjourned the case to early December to facilitate consideration of medical reports being provided by the HSE and to allow the parents consider if they want to get additional reports.
