NHS v VT & Anor

Vikram Sachdeva (instructed by Kennedys) for the Applicant Michael Mylonas QC (instructed by Pannone LLP) for the 1st Respondent Andrew Hockton (instructed by Pannone LLP ) for the 2nd Respondent Hearing dates: 8th,11th November 2013 ____________________

On arrival at the hospital, VT was ventilated, cooled and sedated. He was anaemic and as there was, a background of chronic renal failure and the possibility of haemorrhage this was corrected by transfusion. An initial CT brain scan showed an old frontal parietal infarct, cerebral atrophy and evidence of small vessel disease � I was told probably due to the diabetes. The cooling and sedation were stopped after 24 hours. After five days, it is recorded that VT: "�remained in coma, with abnormal, extensive posturing on stimulation, at a time when he was not sedated significantly."

The decision was taken to extubate VT, as he was no longer dependent on intubation. The Intensive Care Unit notes for 1 st June 2013 stated that there was:

(iv) the high probability of a further intercurrent cardiac arrest and cardiac infarction;

Cardiac arrest, Dr Navapurka told us, would, with absolute certainty, cause further brain damage and, looking at the situation as a whole, even if the family had accurately described what VT's view would have been, were he able to communicate them, Dr Navapurka told me that pursuit of it would be, "�against all the things I stand for as a doctor."