A personal view made in light of the recent news article regarding a husband wanting to sue Addenbrooke's hospital over a Do Not Attempt Resuscitation decision. This article aims to highlight how the rolling out of cross boundary palliative care registers may be more at risk of infringing human rights.

This personal view draws attention to the lack of regard, given by the BMA in its new guidance, to the symptomatic benefit of clinically assisted nutrition and hydration in patients who are not imminently dying. This article aims to identify how ignoring symptomatic benefit is a serious oversight and cause for concern given that this document, endorsed by the General Medical Council and courts, is created with the purpose of providing a framework for best interests decision-making. The new BMA guidance (...) on CANH, which is endorsed by the GMC,1 follows up on the Supreme Court case of An NHS Trust v Y,2 that any removal of CANH from a patient in prolonged disorder of consciousness no longer requires the approval of the court unless there is disagreement or the decision is finely balanced. The decision in …. (shrink)