A judge is quoted as saying:
"The factor which does carry substantial weight, in my judgment, is the preservation of life. Although not an absolute rule, the law regards the preservation of life as a fundamental principle."
"If it is not in M's best interests to withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatment, including artificial nutrition and hydration, were such treatment withheld or withdrawn, this would amount to the actus
of murder." reus
How, then, are these arbitrary judgements viewed, that a person has reached the end of their life and is to be placed on the “care pathway of the dying” and is to be starved of food and fluids and dosed with morphine until they are dead? Is that not, also, murder?
Those complicit in this, through requiring implementation of this “Pathway of the Dying” via the blackmail of the DOH CQUIN payments, are they not guilty, if not of murder, of manslaughter?
It does seem that the
Liverpool Care Pathway stands alone, above criticism and outside the law – above the law.
"Under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 the Court of Protection – which previously only dealt with the financial affairs of those judged by psychiatrists to lack mental capacity – was given the power to decide on medical treatments.
This move was intended to close a loophole identified in the earlier cases, in that it was unclear if any body or individual had the authority to take health care decisions for incapacitated adults."
Focus on Britain's most secretive court Telegraph 28 Sept 2011When the Liverpool care Pathway is invoked, then all that paraphernalia of protection is over-ruled and goes by the board. The decision is taken and implemented by medical professionals, without the knowledge of kith and kin and even the intended victim.
In respect to implementation of LCP, attitudes appear so casual they are really quite callous. In respect to the finality of these protocols, that they will result in the termination, the extinguishing, of a life, it is really quite frightening.