GMC response to High Court ruling on guidance

30 July 2004

We welcomed the opportunity to participate in this debate about aspects of our guidance on Withholding and Withdrawing Life-prolonging Treatment. It's important that our advice should properly represent current law as well as widely shared views about good practice. We are pleased to note Justice Munby's view that he has "..absolutely no difficulty at all with the vast bulk of what the guidance has to say. The guidance is a compelling piece of work.." and "Overall it's a document whose contents, indeed whose whole approach, should greatly reassure patients and their relatives."
His judgement provides helpful clarification in a number of important areas, including making it clear that doctors are not obliged to provide treatment that is futile, or places an intolerable burden on the patient. It is our stated position that in cases where there is disagreement over the care of a patient, the courts should be approached for a ruling. It is again helpful that Justice Munby has provided a list of situations where this is necessary in cases involving artificial nutrition and hydration.
We are also glad that Justice Munby confirms, as we have said, that Mr Burke is entitled to have his wishes followed.
As the case raises important points of principle, and there are some areas where we consider further clarification may be needed, we have sought leave to appeal.