Category Archives: Pro-life

Scott’s law: Talk to me, don’t just starve me to death!

The late Scott Douglas Routley had a nasty road traffic accident around the turn of the century, which damaged his brain.  By 2012, Scott had been comatose, persistently vegetative, “locked-in” – or however you want to put it – for 12 years.   He couldn’t move, or talk.

Scott suffered from a “prolonged disorder of consciousness” (PDOC).  Scott was therefore fed and watered by means of “clinically assisted nutrition and hydration” (CANH).  In that respect, Scott’s condition was similar to that of the late Alfie Evans, about whose death I am presently trying to take the coroner to court, over his refusal to hold an inquest.

A few days ago, the UK’s Supreme Court ruled in An NHS Trust & Ors v Y & Anor [2018] UKSC 46 that there was no need for hospitals to continue pestering the courts, whenever they wanted to get rid of somebody with PDOC by withdrawing his CANH, causing him to die of thirst whilst possibly beginning to feel a bit hungry too if he wasn’t asleep for the duration.

The Supreme Court explained that the Common Law said the hospitals should just get on with the euthanasia concerned, without bothering their lordships, unless the patient’s stubborn family, for example his parents, couldn’t be dissuaded from objecting to this proposed economy.  That, reportedly, was the gist.  You can read more scholarly and neutrally-worded summaries than mine of the case, which I will abbreviate as NHS v Y (and #NHSvY on Twitter), both here and here.

Continue reading

Advertisements

3 Comments

Filed under Alfie Evans, Disability, Human Rights, Law, Pro-life, Targeted

Gagged Dad’s law

The grievance of guest blogger Gagged Dad, the anti-abortion and lawfully homophobic author of

Two year-old’s contact stopped with homophobic dad

is mentioned in all these postsAfter a court case in the UK that lasted more than four years, Gagged Dad’s grievance became expressed as an application to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).  The full 267 pages of the ECtHR application are published here

The all-important initial 42 pages of ECtHR application, outlining the facts and putting the legal arguments, are here.

Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Children's Rights, Family Rights, Gagged Dad, Homophobic, Human Rights, Law, Men's Rights, Pro-life

Alfie Evans application tomorrow at the RCJ

STOP PRESS 14/4/18:   THE APPLICATION WENT AHEAD TODAY, BUT IT WAS NOT SUCCESSFUL.  I HAVE ORDERED A TRANSCRIPT.

THANKS TO ALL WHO SENT KIND MESSAGES TODAY AND YESTERDAY EVENING.

I STILL INTEND TO PRESS AHEAD WITH JUDICIAL REVIEW, AGAINST THE CORONER.  TODAY’S FAILURE TO GET AN INJUNCTION, WHICH WAS ALWAYS AN OPTIMISTIC HOPE, DOES NOT WEAKEN THE FUTURE JUDICIAL REVIEW CASE.  THE JUDICIAL REVIEW CASE IS MORE IMPORTANT ANYWAY.

Please follow this blog, to receive an email alert whenever there is a new development.

(Original post of yesterday follows.)

The funeral of Alfie Evans is reported to be planned for tomorrow.  Having received no reply by 6 o’clock today to my email (copied below) to the lawyers of Alfie’s parents, I have concluded that it will probably be necessary for me to make an urgent application to the court tomorrow, in a bid to prevent the burial or the cremation of Alfie’s body without a prior post mortem examination and toxicology report to determine the cause of Alfie’s death reliably.

I shall be attending at Court 37, at the Royal Courts of Justice, at the start of business, on Monday 14th May 2018. Continue reading

41 Comments

Filed under Alfie Evans, Children's Rights, Family Rights, Human Rights, Law, Pro-life

Alfie Evans’ non-existent coroner’s inquest – what are they trying to hide?

 

It looks as though I am not going to be able to escape from my duty, which seems now to be to bring another court case before long, this time against the Coroner of Liverpool.

Continue reading

173 Comments

Filed under Alfie Evans, Children's Rights, Law, Pro-life

Ellinor Grimmark, the Swedish midwife who refused to perform abortions

Ellinor Grimmark got sacked, for her conscientious objection to participating in the abortion industry in Sweden.   I have signed a petition about this, not so much because I expect the people who sacked Ellinor to take any notice of any outrage of mine, as that I wanted thus to congratulate this noble martyr to conscience on making the sacrificial stand she did.  Far too few are they who nowadays thus place morals above career.

Continue reading

5 Comments

Filed under Petitions, Pro-life, Righteousness

The right to die -v- the right to life

Image

The EU Directive published today on the right to die places the EU Commission on a direct collision course with the Council of Europe, which is still, in its European Convention on Human Rights, rather sold on the outdated notion of humans having a so-called “right to life” (Article 2).

The right to life is incorporated into UK law by the Human Rights Act 1998.  Because today’s Directive has direct applicability, the right to die established in today’s Directive is directly incorporated into UK law, with immediate effect, by the European Communities Act 1972.  This is an Act, which, as the late Master of the Rolls Lord Denning observed, Parliament may not have the freedom to repeal that it imagined it would have, when it passed the Act, even if UKIP gets elected to power.

As from today, therefore, without Parliament having to lift a legislative finger to implement the EU provision, the new British right to die now sits uncomfortably alongside the old British right to stay alive.

Continue reading

9 Comments

Filed under April fool!, Human Rights, Law, Pro-life, Satire and humour

Shopping for medical opinions

New-Twitter-Bird-LogoFollow @John_Allman

This blog post

UKHR

Touch the image to read the gist in brief

Bipolar patient has capacity to decide to terminate pregnancy

about this judgment of the Court of Protection

SB (A Patient; Capacity To Consent To Termination), Re [2013] EWHC 1417 (COP) (21 May 2013)

has set me thinking.

BigBroJohn

. . .

A tense, life-or-death, courtroom drama

Pitched against her own legal team, the mental patient, Mrs SB, had two psychiatrists, her mother, her father, her husband (presumably the baby’s father) and the NHS hospital in which she was sectioned, along with their various solicitors and barristers, all agreeing that she was “not thinking straight”.

WeighBabyHer baby was not legally represented in court.  As the nice judge said, “the foetus has no independent rights which fall to be weighed or considered by me at all in these proceedings”. 

Present (though hardly as a disinterested, mere spectator), was the enterprising would-be sub-contractor who had put in a last-minute bid to do the job, less than a week before the mother reached 24 weeks pregnant, and the baby’s life would have become untouchable.   “A doctor employed by a well known body”, is how the judge described this potential beneficiary of the judge’s own hard day’s work, when the abortionist put in his own “hard day at the orifice”.

money_love_scale

The abortion industry’s income, and love for humanity, have to weighed jolly carefully in the scales of justice nowadays

At 23 and a bit weeks, the foetus could perhaps be delivered alive, and would stand a chance of surviving.  The slower the wheels of justice ground, the better the foetus’ chances of making it.  But the court wasn’t “Thinking outside the botch” today.   Nothing but death would suffice, for some reason.  That was what was stipulated in the abortionist’s – er – contract.

The case would therefore need to be decided quickly.  There was robust justice to be done.  The judge didn’t start delivering his judgment until 8 o’clock in the evening.  What a hero.  Tomorrow might have been too late.  They still had to find a second doctor to sign the death warrant, and time was running out.   What if not even the “well-known body” could come up with a second signatory, who knew how to “weigh” stuff that “fell to be considered”?

Here is the gist of the UK Human Rights blog post’s summary of the court’s judgment:

66

CourtOfProtectionThe patient … was a 37 year old highly intelligent graduate… 8 years she presented with symptoms … of bi-polar disorder. She had been detained … at various times … These proceedings were issued … because the mother concerned was “very strongly” requesting a termination … It was clear from the patient’s own evidence that she herself did want a baby at the time that she conceived it.  But after the first trimester had elapsed, in April, she started to show signs of her disorder and there was a “total reversal” in her attitude towards the baby …

MrJusticeHolmanThe judge was prepared to take the unusual step of differing from the view of the psychiatrists that she would bitterly regret the termination. …  The decision, with its risks of consequent regret, was one that the patient should be at liberty to take.  The judge fully appreciated her situation, including the fact that she was currently compulsorily detained. … the Court … the judge has to consider whether the reasons for a decision are rational.  This does not mean that they have to be good reasons, nor does the court have to agree with the patient’s decision…

99

Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Disability, Law, Mental health, Political, Pro-life, Satire and humour