British Medical Council Appeals Right-to-Life Ruling (Update2)

May 16 (Bloomberg) -- Britain's General Medical Council appealed a court ruling blocking the withdrawal of food and drink from a man with a degenerative brain disease, arguing the judgment may force doctors to use harmful or unnecessary treatments on other patients.

Leslie Burke, 45, in July 2004 won the right to have artificial nutrition continued even when he can no longer physically communicate his wishes. The U.K. High Court ruled that parts of the Council's existing guidance on life-prolonging treatment was unlawful and could have led to nourishment being withdrawn in violation of Burke's human rights.

The ruling seemed to introduce ``important changes to the law in this area'' which required more ``clarity and certainty,'' the Council's lawyer, Philip Havers QC, today told the Court of Appeal in London.

The case comes as courts worldwide grapple with issues surrounding the care of terminally ill or incapacitated people. A brain-damaged Florida woman, Terri Schiavo, in March became the focus of debate when courts declined to bar the disconnection of her feeding and drinking tube after a seven-year legal battle between her parents and her husband. Schiavo died on March 31.

The U.K. General Medical Council, which is charged with safeguarding the health and safety of the public, today claimed that the 2004 judgment may have improperly altered the relationship between patients and their doctors, requiring medical professionals to provide treatment that would be harmful or of no clinical benefit.

Not `Straightforward'

The council also claims that the High Court erred in concluding that the provision of artificial nutrition and hydration was a ``straightforward'' treatment and instead depends on the circumstances of each case.

``Whether it is in the best interests of the patient to start or continue life-prolonging treatment may mean addressing a number of difficult ethical as well as legal issues,'' Havers said in documents filed with the court.

Burke suffers from cerebellar ataxia, a nervous system disorder that causes lack of co-ordination, slurred speech and loss of sight and hearing. His mental faculties are currently unimpaired, but he is likely to require artificial nutrition when his ability to swallow is compromised. Burke's younger brother also suffers from the disease.

Burke ``does not want to die of thirst,'' his lawyer, Richard Gordon QC, said in documents filed with the court. ``He would want to be provided with water and food until he dies of natural causes.''

Seeking Guidance

The Council wants more guidance on how the High Court judgment applies to other forms of life-saving treatment, such as respiratory intervention or antibiotics, and on what basis a doctor can withdraw treatment if a patient hasn't given any instructions.

Havers today said that the appeal didn't concern Burke's individual right to receive food and drink.

``There is nothing to suggest he will not be provided with the artificial nutrition and hydration with which he wishes to be provided with when he requires it, which will hopefully be many years hence,'' Havers told the court. The Council wants to prevent doctors from being held legally liable for failing to perform treatments that patients consider to be in their best interest, he said.

U.K. Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt, the Disability Rights Commission, the Catholic Bishops Conference for England and Wales and the Medical Ethics Alliance have been granted permission to file submissions in the case.

The hearing is expected to conclude on May 18.

The case is 2004/2086 General Medical Council and Oliver Leslie Burke.

To contact the reporter on this story: Megan Murphy in London at mmurphy41@bloomberg.net.