30.06.2013 Views

View/Open - Scholarly Commons Home

View/Open - Scholarly Commons Home

View/Open - Scholarly Commons Home

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

The sterilisation was regarded as unnecessary by the headmaster and social worker at<br />

the school D attended. They initiated a complaint to the school’s medical officer. The<br />

judge found that the family doctor was unmovable in his opinions about the benefit of<br />

the sterilisation and that “his views were clouded by resentment at what he considered<br />

unjustified interference” (p. 4). It was established that D had sufficient intellectual<br />

capacity to marry in the future. On those grounds, and with considerable evidence<br />

which rejected the sterilisation of 11 year old girls because it was outside the realms of<br />

usual practice, the judge declared the procedure unlawful.<br />

Since Re D [1976], a number of other cases have been brought to court by people<br />

concerned about unfettered clinical decisions made on behalf of people who cannot<br />

make their own decisions. For example, in Australia a decision to perform a<br />

hysterectomy on a 15 year old intellectually disabled girl was brought to court by an<br />

advocacy officer of the New South Wales Council for Intellectual Disability (Re<br />

Elizabeth [1989], p. 2).<br />

Health professionals responded to the new environment of uncertainty by seeking<br />

juridical sanction for their treatment decisions. For example, Tony Bland who was a<br />

victim of the Hillsborough football stadium disaster in England in 1989. In the tragedy,<br />

Tony Bland’s lungs were crushed and the supply of oxygen to his brain was interrupted.<br />

As a result, he suffered catastrophic and irreversible damage to the higher centres of his<br />

brain resulting in a condition known as persistent vegetative state (PVS). Someone in<br />

PVS breathes unaided and digestion continues to function. But, although his eyes are<br />

open, he cannot see. He cannot hear. The patient is incapable of voluntary movement<br />

and can feel no pain. He cannot taste or smell. He cannot speak or communicate in<br />

anyway. He has no cognitive function and can thus feel no emotion, whether pleasure<br />

or distress. The space which the brain should occupy is full of watery fluid. With<br />

skilled nursing and close medical attention a young and otherwise healthy PVS patient<br />

may live for many years. Tony Bland could not swallow, and was fed by means of a<br />

tube, through which liquefied food was mechanically pumped into his stomach.<br />

(Summary adapted from the appellate judgement of Sir Thomas Bingham MR, Airedale<br />

NHS Trust v Bland, [1993]).<br />

143

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!