Posted on 08/27/2026 5:11:55 PM PDT by little jeremiah
Mr Justice McKendrick has ruled that providing clinically assisted nutrition and hydration to sustain the life of a 28-year-old man suffering from a prolonged disorder of consciousness is contrary to his best interests and should cease.
The judgment, released today following a 4-day trial last week, overrules the unanimous view of the young man’s family and all his treating clinicians that the life-sustaining treatment should continue, agreed at a ‘best interests meeting’ in March.
Mr Justice McKendrick has ruled that providing clinically assisted nutrition and hydration to sustain the life of a 28-year-old man suffering from a prolonged disorder of consciousness is contrary to his best interests and should cease.
The judgment, released today following a 4-day trial last week, overrules the unanimous view of the young man’s family and all his treating clinicians that the life-sustaining treatment should continue, agreed at a ‘best interests meeting’ in March.
The case is subject to draconian reporting restrictions under the so-called Transparency Order, which Mr Justice McKendrick has ordered to remain in force until the death of the young man, known only as FHR.
In her prolonged legal battle to save her son’s life, FHR’s mother, anonymised as FN, is supported by the Christian Legal Centre. FHR suffered a catastrophic brain injury in 2020. After nearly five years of living at home under the care of his mother, the Court of Protection in 2025 ordered his forcible removal to a care home, supposedly temporarily for an assessment of his neurological condition. However, he was never returned home and the care home banned FHR’s mother from visiting him for some 16 months.
The gagging order was then issued by the Court in response to a viral video released by FHR’s mother on social media in April 2025 telling her son’s story. Last month, Mr Justice McKendrick refused the mother’s application to lift the Transparency Order to enable proper coverage of the trial, where FHR’s family resisted the application by the NHS North East London Integrated Care Board to end their son’s life.
Since being moved to the care home in April 2025, FHR’s health rapidly deteriorated, requiring as many as five emergency hospital admissions for a number of weeks, with infections and at time sepsis. The family argued that if FHR is returned home, his condition and his quality of life were likely to improve again.
Having examined FHR and his medical records, an eminent expert in neurorehabilitation and prolonged disorders of consciousness, Dr Judith Allanson, told the Court in her evidence last week that he was not suffering from pain or distress and there was a chance of recovery of brain function. Dr Allanson concluded that despite being drowsy from sedative drugs, FHR had some conscious awareness – she saw him smile in response to his father talking to him about football, the recent World Cup, and mentioned his favourite team, Arsenal.
On another occasion, a different expert observed an “emotional response” to his father’s conversation, where FHR shed tears in after his father talking to him about God and prayed with him. Dr Allanson recommended a careful review of FHR’s sedative medications and whether he needs a tracheostomy before his level of awareness could be properly assessed.
The Court-appointed expert, rehabilitation consultant Ajoy Nair, agreed that a review of tracheostomy “should be attempted if at all possible” but argued that “spending more time, effort and resources, and tinkering with his medications when he has a catastrophic brain injury are meaningless”.
Dr Nair recommended to withdraw nutrition and hydration and explained that would mean that FHR would die within 1-3 weeks: “Patients in this category will develop dehydration and multiorgan failure. Renal failure, acidosis, uraemia, and other metabolic and electrolyte disturbances that will ultimately end in cardiorespiratory arrest”.
In today’s judgment, Mr Justice McKendrick agreed with Dr Nair’s recommendations. He concluded that sustaining FHR’s life with food and fluids “consigns FHR to an existence of distress with such limited consciousness and communication that his life is devoid of comfort or pleasure. There is little prospect of that ever changing.” He rejected the family’s evidence as unreliable on the grounds that their “love has the power to impair our objectivity”.
Responding to the judgment in a statement released through her solicitors, FN said: “I do not want to prolong my son’s life artificially, but it is unacceptable to bring about his death in the way the system has done. Even murderers and rapists do not get death sentences from the court, but my son now has it – for no other crime than being severely disabled. “All I wanted was for my kid to be allowed to live naturally and to die naturally.
“The system has treated my son with unbelievable cruelty. My son was stable and happy at home, he was surrounded by love from his family, and I believe his condition was gradually improving. The system then abducted him, locked him up, isolated him from his family, ruined his physical health, drugged him up with sedatives, and has now obtained a court order to starve him to death.
“I believe that ending his life was always their agenda and the only thing standing between death and my son was the love and protection of his family – so that was brutally removed by force.
“It is probably too late now to save my son, but if so, the system which has done this to him should be held to account.”
Euthanasia, often without the victim’s consent, is rampant in the UK, Canada, Switzerland and now in many states. Culture of death, evil to the max.
Unlike many times previously, however, the story that follows is VERY similar to that from the UK.
Indeed, while this article is about the UK, don’t kid yourself: Euthanasia is “legal” in America if you’re not careful, and with the tacit approval (if not support) of the medical-industrial complex.
A good friend's father was hospitalized a few years ago with a heart attack and hooked up to machines. The attending doctor didn't think the old man would make it.
My friend, respecting Dad's wishes to not be on machines, signed a paper approving the de-machining and putting the Dad on "comfort care" which (IN GENERAL) is basically no curative care.
That was ok - that was the Dad's wishes.
The old man pulled through, but the hospital refused to put Dad back on fluids or nutrition because - you guessed it - "comfort care" IN THAT HOSPITAL and for THAT DOCTOR is effectively Terri Schaivo-style starvation and dehydration.
They said - and if you follow the link you’ll see concurrence from other ghouls - food and water was a medical treatment and thus "curative" and AGAINST the rules of "comfort care."
My friend was stunned. And the attending and her team wouldn't budge - ”you signed the document giving consent.”
For the next few days, my friend and siblings heard from scores of nurses etc that withholding fluids was effectively "the right thing to do"....very Terri Schaivo-like. They also threw in “Dad live a good long life” and “he will never come back the way he was.”
It took a virtual miracle whereby a different doctor intervened, said the father clearly wasn't terminal, and put the old man back on nutrition and fluids.
While my friend's Dad passed away peacefully in his sleep a few weeks later, it was on the Dad’s terms.
It’s also worth noting that the siblings were split on “comfort care.” There WAS a view that it was ok for Dad to dehydrate to death. Someone even said that dehydration is painless; I heard the total opposite during the Schaivo murder.
Euthanasia is, technically, illegal in the USA. And I know many people would be OK if fluids were withheld when it is THEIR time to go. Fair enough.
But euthanasia can be made legal - in America - if you're not careful with the Fine Print or vetting the "mercy killing" mindset of the attending.
It’s happened here to. They starved and dehydrated Terri to death.
We had a case like this in Florida a number of years ago. When Jeb Bush was Governor. He got involved. It was very ugly.
Terri Schiavo I think was her name.
Here’s hoping that no one goes to this sadist Dr. Nair for treatment of any kind. Nor have another case under this incompetent judge.
Terry Schiavo? If that’s the one I remember SO clearly!
YES and it was SO horrible.
Thank you for this info. Euthanasia (sic) “good death” is so evil.
Justice is no biologist.
Six paragraphs down, you finally find out this is in England, Strange “journalism.”
A black-robed ruler bangs a gavel and people die.
Does anyone remember Terry Shiavo? Or am I just old.
Taxpayer-funded healthcare. What could go wrong?
Yes, I saw her parents years ago at an Eagle Forum presentation. That was a huge case. Her husband had promised to take care of her to get a big payout, and then changed his mind against all we know of Terry’s wishes, and certainly of her parents.
Keep posting that. I’ve seen it myself, getting older so watching the even older relatives deal w/the “system”.
They will definitely allow you to “let someone go” if you want.
I’d only add that their “nursing” nomenclature is, perhaps deliberately, misleading in elder care.
They have all different grades of people with “nurse” in their title, but some of those are no more than butt wipers. I always thought they should be given unique names. A “licensed practical” nurse and “registered” nurse are different. They should not both have nurse in the title. You don’t hear of “licensed practical doctors” do you?
And “nursing” homes don’t deserve the title. They will maintain an IV if a patient arrives with one, but you have to go to the hospital to get one to start, even though there is a doctor and nurse on staff at the home.
I’ll never forgive Jeb Bush for murdering Terri Schiavo...and in such a cruel manner. What a terrible, terrible thing to do.
We were told Terry Shaivo would be in a state of euphoria as the government starved her to death. These murderous judges need to lead by example and volunteer to go in to the gib et and show us how wonderful it is to die in such a way.
And liberal groups. F U TOO.
They will spend millions and hold back nothing to save a convicted murderer from execution. But for a helpless person or a baby they will help kill.
A government big enough to give you health care is big enough to take away your health care.
It sickens me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.