Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court determines that while nasogastric feeding, including under restraint, constitutes "treatment" within the meaning of an applicable mental health statute, it is not authorised for administration without consent. The Court found that the law does not provide for an independent review of such treatment, a safeguard deemed necessary given the significant interference with personal rights that nasogastric feeding under restraint entails. Consequently, the Court's inherent jurisdiction to permit nasogastric feeding under restraint was not considered, as the specific treatment had been removed from the patient's care plan and the patient discharged from the hospital.
Nasogastric feeding, restraint, Mental Health Act 2001, treatment, involuntary patient, consent, safeguards, independent review, High Court, personal rights, inherent jurisdiction, discharge.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
The only e-mail alert service for all Irish judgments over the past 13 years. Click here to request a subscription.
Register Now