Human Rights

NHS issues a “DNR” for Down syndrome man without his consent

In a blatant act of discrimination, Britain’s NHS was found to have issued a DNR – “do not resuscitate” – in the file of a patient without his consent, or the consent of his family. Their reason for doing so?

Because he has Down syndrome.

An NHS hospital is being sued by a family who say doctors placed a “do not resuscitate” order on their relative, denying him potentially life-saving treatment, because he has Down’s syndrome.

The unnamed family are bringing a legal challenge against a hospital in Kent where a doctor apparently decided staff should make no attempt to resuscitate the patient if he suffered cardiac or respiratory arrest, on the basis of his disability.

Lawyers for the family said a form added to the man’s medical notes last September gave the reasons for no resuscitation as “Down’s syndrome”, “unable to swallow” (the man has a feeding tube in his stomach), “bedbound” and “learning difficulties”.

The form, which said the decision should remain in force indefinitely, showed the doctor concerned had no discussion with the patient because the patient did not have mental capacity, said the lawyers.

The man, referred to as AWA, is still alive and in residential care a year later, after his carers argued for the DNR to be removed.

No information was given to his next of kin or sought from them, because they were “unavailable”. A space where clinicians should report whether an information leaflet about such decisions has been given to AWA’s family was blank.

The family visited the hospital every day. The doctors could have asked them for permission at any time – but they didn’t. This man has learning difficulties, but he isn’t a vegetable. But according to the NHS, because he has a disability, he isn’t even worthy of making a decision on whether he gets to live or die.

Let that sink in: because a man had Down syndrome, he was denied the right to choose whether he got to live or die.

It makes a pretty compelling argument that the NHS sees those with disabilities as less than human. And how many others has this happened to? People whose families weren’t able to find the DNR form, or whose parents had already passed away? A story like this strikes fear into my heart because, God willing, my son will outlive me. And when I’m gone, what are the chances that something like this could happen to him if I’m not there to advocate for him? How many adults with Down syndrome are in that exact situation: needing life-saving medical care, which is being denied to them simply because they have a disability, and no family to prevent that from happening? The thought is terrifying.

It’s said that you can judge a society by how it treats the weakest among them. What does a story like this, then, say about Britain?

Live Action on Facebook
  • Big Al

    Heartbreaking that this could happen. I think there are several causes that lead people, Doctors included, to feel that some human life isn’t worthy (abortion for one). It’s happened before, in Germany, when some people with mental defects were viewed a inferior and problamatic for the ‘state’. We know from history where that road led to. It can happen here, too. We have to be ever vigilant and speak out forcefully whenever we see something like this happening… for there by the grace of God go I. Here it’s Downs syndrome. Next age… then evenually the color of your eyes.

  • Richard

    It’s a shame that women in this country are viewed similarly to be so mentally incompetent that they’re treated like brainless incubators, who shouldn’t be allowed to make decisions regarding whether or not they give birth.

    • http://www.facebook.com/beverly.harlton Beverly Harlton

      Women are not being treated like “brainless incubators” in this country, Richard. All we ask is that they not murder their children in utero. They make the decision to give birth when they have sex. It’s not about their life anymore; it’s about their life AND the life of the human child they now carry. Clearly, you have no compassion whatsoever for this marginalised man with Down’s Syndrome if all you can do is cheapen his plight with faulty rhetoric.

      • Richard

        Women do *not* make the decision to give birth when they have sex. What a ridiculous thing to say. And saying that it’s “not about their life anymore” is tantamount to making them your womb-slaves, which they’re not. Women are persons free to have sex whenever, however and with whomever they so choose and to *not* have baby as a result.

        You really trivialize and make a mockery of parenthood if you take the position that women be forced to become parents every time they have sex.

        You are doing more than simply “asking” that women not “murder their children”–YOU are trying to make a decision for them that is NOT YOURS to make.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Daniel-Durham/100002906757423 Daniel Durham

          I agree with you, Richard, that requiring women to carry to term is a violation of their freedom. I just maintain that said violation is far LESS wrong than the murder of a legally innocent human being.

          • Richard

            Daniel, I agree that unborn children are “innocent” and respect your opinion regarding the relative rights of the woman and the unborn child, even if I do not agree with it.

            I believe that abortion should be rare, but not illegal, and prefer that a woman, regardless of her circumstances should not have to suffer from the inability to make decisions regarding the life she chooses to bring in to the world.

        • http://www.facebook.com/beverly.harlton Beverly Harlton

          No one’s forcing them to become parents. If you think that a woman can become pregnant every time she has sex, I strongly suggest that you familiarise yourself with a biology book or an anatomy book. Women can only become pregnant when they are ovulating, and as sperm can survive for up to five days in the female reproductive tract, there’s only about one week out of the month that the average woman can become pregnant.

          Technically, women become mothers as soon as they conceive, but no one is forcing them to raise their children. There are already huge waiting lists to adopt babies. Just give them up at birth and never have anything to do with them again if you’re so dead set against raising a child. That’s fine. What is so inherently wrong with letting someone else love and raise that “unwanted” child? I find that pro-”choice” notion to be completely baffling.

          If a woman wants to have sex willy-nilly, she needs to familiarise herself with her body and take the necessary steps to avoid conception in the first place. If she has nothing against contraception, she can use whatever pill or prophylactic she wants. If not, she can use NFP to learn when she is fertile and avoid intercourse on those days. She can also communicate with her partner and make it clear that she doesn’t want a child. Why is this so abhorrent to folks like you? Women should take responsibility for their actions and make informed decisions, not kill their unborn children as a get-out-of-jail-free card.

          As much as you lack concern for the lives of the unborn, I am frankly shocked that you do not appear to care about the lives of this born man with Down’s Syndrome and others like him. I thought born people were the only ones that mattered to you pro-”choicers.” I’m honestly not sure why I continue to mention this poor fellow; you’re just going to ignore his plight and spew asinine nonsense about “womb-slaves.” I hope that some day, you have the opportunity to work with someone with Down’s Syndrome so you can see what a treasure they are, and that you can truly care for them as much as, if not more than you pretend to care about women.