By Helen Turnham and Dominic Wilkinson Following the release of the judgment in Abbasi and Haastrup [2023] EWCA Civ 331 Abbasi and another (Respondents) v Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (Appellant); Haastrup (Respondent) v King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (Appellant) – UK Supreme Court, April 2025, a ripple of conversation and concern […]
Category: Law
The New Gatekeepers: the role of the UK High Court in the oversight of medical assistance in dying
By Sean R. Riley After decades of unsuccessful attempts by advocates, in November 2024, the United Kingdom House of Commons passed a second reading of a bill permitting medical assistance-in-dying (MAiD). The bill still faces a long legislative road before royal assent, but MAiD may very well be a reality for English and Welsh terminally […]
Could a potential cure for morning sickness actually lead to more discrimination for pregnant women?
By Frances Hand. Scientific research has recently been published which explains why almost 80% of women experience morning sickness during pregnancy. This study revealed a causal link between foetal production of the hormone GDF15 and nausea and vomiting during pregnancy. It is therefore hoped that, given this new information, more precise mechanisms can now be […]
The delicate balance between aggressive treatments and palliative care
By Ilaria Bertini. In recent months the story of Indi Gregory has been brought to light by the media as another dreadful story of life and death involving a critically ill 8-month-old baby with no prospect of recovery. When Indi was born, she was admitted as a PICU patient at Queen’s Medical Centre in Nottingham […]
Additional factors tending against the prosecution of suspects in cases of ‘mercy killings’ ought to concern all sides of the debate
By Rebecca Limb. Assisted dying is unlawful in England and Wales. To end or assist in the ending of another’s life out of compassion for and/or at the direction of the victim is not a defence to murder. A suspect will be prosecuted where there is sufficient evidence and it is in the public interest […]
Preservation of Foetus in case of medical termination of Pregnancy of sexual assault victims: An Indian perspective
By Aditi Srivastava. The intersection of laws relating to medical termination of pregnancy and criminal procedure gives rise to complex and critical medico-legal issues. This blog post delves into one such issue, that is, the role of foetal tissue preservation in cases of medical termination of pregnancy involving sexual assault victims, in the Indian context. […]
Reflections on the misrepresentation of one’s work
By Richard B. Gibson. In 2020, I published an article called No Harm, No Foul? Body Integrity Identity Disorder and the Metaphysics of Grievous Bodily Harm. The piece highlights the lack of definitional clarity within English and Welsh criminal law regarding what harm is, arguing that the concept’s open to varying interpretations. It uses metaphysics […]
Should healthcare workers vote to strike?
By Ben Saunders. As I write, in August 2023, junior doctors in the UK are once again being balloted over strike action. While the ethics of strikes by healthcare workers has been hotly debated, less attention has been given to the balloting procedures. This is unfortunate, since the requirements imposed by the Trade Union Act […]
Me, my cells and I: reflecting on the value of the genome in light of the Lacks family settlement
By Aileen Editha. “Not only were the HeLa cells derived from Henrietta Lacks – the HeLa cells are Henrietta Lacks” – Ben Crump, attorney for the Lacks family. (He)nrietta (La)cks Henrietta Lacks was a Black tobacco farmer living in Baltimore, Maryland. She was treated for cervical cancer at Johns Hopkins University Hospital, one of the […]
The UK Supreme Court just made meaningful patient involvement in medical decision-making more difficult
By Jennifer O’Neill. This week, the United Kingdom Supreme Court (UKSC) revisited its ruling in the landmark case of Montgomery v Lanarkshire [2015]. In McCulloch v Forth Valley Health Board [2023], the Supreme Court Justices established that doctors do not need to inform patients of all possible treatment alternatives as a requirement of informed consent. […]