Podcast Location:
Download it here [file size: 27.6 MB]
Categories:
Human Rights, Civil Liberties & Public Law
Personal Injury
Capacity & Court of Protection
CPD Points:
Up to 1 point. details »

Due to the difference in guidelines between the SRA and the Bar Standards Board, CPD points are awarded differently for Solicitors, Barristers and Legal Executives:

Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority:
Listen and pass the quiz: Gain 1 CPD point (60 minutes)
Listen only, gain ½ a CPD point (30 minutes)

Regulated by the Bar Standards Board:
Listen and pass the quiz: Gain 1 accredited CPD point (60 minutes)

Regulated by ILEX:
Listen and pass the quiz: Gain 1 CPD point (60 minutes)
Listen only, gain ½ a CPD point (30 minutes)

Cost:
  • FREE
Length:
30 minutes of audio
(+ optional 5 minute online quiz)
Plays on Computer:
Yes Downloadable as MP3:    Yes
Contributor(s):
Course Aims:

In this two-part podcast series Vikram Sachdeva and Victoria Butler-Cole who both acted on behalf of M in the landmark medical ethics case of W v M (2011] EWHC 2443 (Fam) discuss the withdrawal of artificial nutrition and hydration from patients in a minimally conscious state. Vikram and Victoria provide a useful outline of the law and principles in this fascinating and controversial area and explain how to identify a case which may be suitable for an application for a declaration that withdrawal of ANH is lawful, how to prepare those cases before going to court and how the court will conduct the balancing process to establish a patient’s best interests.

Outcomes:
After completing the course you will:
  • Be familiar with the House of Lords decision in Bland and the legal framework governing the law relating to decisions about mentally incapacitated adults;
  • Understand the role ‘advance decisions’ will have in deciding whether to withdraw treatment;
  • Be familiar with the position after W v M;
  • Appreciate what is involved in identifying appropriate cases for withdrawal of life-sustaining medical treatment measures;
  • Be aware of the essential preparatory steps to take prior to going to court;
  • Recognise the role expert evidence will play in these cases;
  • Appreciate the role of reporting restrictions in this context;
  • Understand how the court will conduct the balancing process.
Level:
Specialist Difficulty: 5 of 5
Classification:
Case Update
Legal Principles
Market Update / Hot Topic
Panel Discussion
Practical Guide
Sources and References:
  • Airedale NHS Trust v Bland [1993] AC 789;
  • Code of Practice 5.31;
  • Mental Capacity Act 2005;
  • Re M [2012] 1 WLR 287;
  • W v M [2011] EWHC 2443 (COP).

In this two-part podcast series barristers Vikram Sachdeva and Victoria Butler-Cole from 39 Essex Chambers discuss withdrawal of artificial nutrition and hydration after W v M.

Date recorded: 25th July 2012

Start this CPDcast Activity

© CPDcast.com