Puzzles of the Liminal Dead: St George's University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust v Casey

Simple item page
dc.check.date2026-02-08
dc.check.infoAccess to this item is restricted until 24 months after publication by request of the publisher
dc.contributor.authorDonnelly, Mary
dc.contributor.authorLyons, Barry
dc.date.accessioned2024-05-08T14:53:36Z
dc.date.available2024-05-06T12:21:12Zen
dc.date.available2024-05-08T14:53:36Z
dc.date.issued2024-02-08
dc.date.updated2024-05-06T11:21:18Zen
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: St George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v Casey [1] is the latest in a growing line of cases before the UK courts concerning objections to the determination of brain stem death (BD). [2] The case is distinguishable from most of the earlier jurisprudence because it concerned an adult [3] and, in this respect, it provides helpful clarity regarding the procedural framework to be applied in such situations. However, as we will see below, in other respects the case serves to increase confusion. One particular problem that arises from the judgment in Casey is how we conceptualise the legal status of an individual who has been found to be brain dead by clinicians, but this finding is disputed by families, either in respect of procedure or substance, and the courts have been asked to rule on the matter. The case also raises new questions about the operationalization of testing for BD, which questions assume particular significance given the ongoing work to revise the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges’ Code of Practice for the Diagnosis and Confirmation of Death (2008) (hereafter ‘the Code’). This commentary will explore both of these aspects of the case. First, however, we outline the facts and identify those areas in which the legal position has been clarified.
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden
dc.description.versionAccepted Version
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen
dc.identifier.citationDonnelly, M. and Lyons, B. (2024) ‘Puzzles of the Liminal Dead: St George's University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust v Casey’, Medical Law Review, 32(1), pp. 111–119. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwae001.
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwae001en
dc.identifier.endpage119
dc.identifier.issn0967-0742
dc.identifier.issn1464-3790
dc.identifier.issued1
dc.identifier.journaltitleMedical Law Review
dc.identifier.startpage111
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10468/15847
dc.identifier.volume32
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherOxford University Press
dc.rights© 2024 Oxford University Press. This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced version of an article accepted for publication in Medical Law Review following peer review. The version of record [Donnelly, M. and Lyons, B. (2024) ‘Puzzles of the Liminal Dead: St George's University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust v Caseyy’, Medical Law Review, 32(1), pp. 111–119] is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwae001
dc.subjectBrain death
dc.subjectCourt of Protection
dc.subjectBest Interests
dc.subjectOfficial Solicitor
dc.titlePuzzles of the Liminal Dead: St George's University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust v Caseyen
dc.typeArticle (peer-reviewed)
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
CaseyfinalCORA.pdf
Size:
266.46 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Accepted version
Collections
IRIS Collection