The application in the case of W v M and others (hereafter W v M)1 asked the court to authorise the withdrawal of artificial nutrition and hydration (ANH) from a woman in a minimally conscious state (MCS). Tragically, M suffered extensive and irreparable brain damage at the age of 43 following viral encephalitis, which struck her down in February 2003 just as she was preparing to go on holiday with her long-term partner. Since this time M has been entirely dependent on others for her care, including being fed artificially via a gastrostomy tube. Initially M was diagnosed as being in a vegetative state, which has traditionally been referred to as a permanent or persistent vegetative state (PVS).2 In spite of the bleak prognosis, for several years M's partner and family, together with the medical team, explored all the possibilities for M's recovery, but eventually it was decided by the family that as M's prospects were hopeless, it would be in her best interests to have all life-sustaining treatment withdrawn. At this point, they applied to the High Court for an order to withdraw ANH in accordance with the requirement set down in the case of Airedale NHS Trust v Bland.3 However, during the course of the subsequent investigations to confirm M's diagnosis for the purposes of the application, it was discovered that in fact M was not vegetative, but rather in a state of minimal consciousness (MCS).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alexandra Mullock (2012) studied this question.