Article info
PDFNeurological history
The persistent vegetative state, treatment withdrawal, and the Hillsborough disaster: Airedale NHS Trust v Bland
Citation
The persistent vegetative state, treatment withdrawal, and the Hillsborough disaster: Airedale NHS Trust v Bland
Publication history
- First published July 17, 2006.
Online issue publication
April 14, 2016
Request permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information
Copyright 2006 Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery and Psychiatry
Other content recommended for you
- Causes and consequences of delays in treatment-withdrawal from PVS patients: a case study of Cumbria NHS Clinical Commissioning Group v Miss S and Ors [2016] EWCOP 32
- A matter of life and death: controversy at the interface between clinical and legal decision-making in prolonged disorders of consciousness
- Judge over-rules family's wish that patient should be allowed to die
- Ethical issues in nutrition support: a view from the coalface
- Current controversies and irresolvable disagreement: the case of Vincent Lambert and the role of ‘dissensus’
- Court applications for withdrawal of artificial nutrition and hydration from patients in a permanent vegetative state: family experiences
- Mother asks court to let her brain damaged daughter die
- A matter of life and death
- Permanent loss of awareness is crucial to diagnosis of PVS
- Withdrawing clinically assisted nutrition and hydration (CANH) in patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness: is there still a role for the courts?