This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/apr/25/woman-died-kidney-treatment-losing-sparkle-cannot-be-named-court-rules
The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 3 | Version 4 |
|---|---|
| Inquest of woman who 'lost sparkle' to be held without naming her | Inquest of woman who 'lost sparkle' to be held without naming her |
| (about 2 hours later) | |
| An inquest into the death of a woman who died after refusing life-saving treatment is to be held without her being named after a senior court of protection judge extended an anonymity order. | An inquest into the death of a woman who died after refusing life-saving treatment is to be held without her being named after a senior court of protection judge extended an anonymity order. |
| The highly unusual procedure will prevent identification of the 50-year-old, who said she no longer wished to live because everything in her life that “sparkles” – chiefly her youth and beauty – had gone. | The highly unusual procedure will prevent identification of the 50-year-old, who said she no longer wished to live because everything in her life that “sparkles” – chiefly her youth and beauty – had gone. |
| Mr Justice Charles, the second most senior court of protection judge in England and Wales, handed down the decision after media organisations applied for the woman to be identified on the grounds that she had died. | Mr Justice Charles, the second most senior court of protection judge in England and Wales, handed down the decision after media organisations applied for the woman to be identified on the grounds that she had died. |
| The judge ruled that there was no public interest in C, as the woman is known in the court proceedings, being identified. She died last year. | The judge ruled that there was no public interest in C, as the woman is known in the court proceedings, being identified. She died last year. |
| Extending the order to cover the coroner’s court, which he envisages will be held in open session, was necessary, Charles added, because: “The history of the prurient nature of some of the earlier reporting is a clear indicator that such reporting might be repeated.” | Extending the order to cover the coroner’s court, which he envisages will be held in open session, was necessary, Charles added, because: “The history of the prurient nature of some of the earlier reporting is a clear indicator that such reporting might be repeated.” |
| Her case became the subject of legal action after King’s College hospital NHS foundation trust in London asked a judge to decide whether she had the mental capacity to decide to refuse treatment. | Her case became the subject of legal action after King’s College hospital NHS foundation trust in London asked a judge to decide whether she had the mental capacity to decide to refuse treatment. |
| Charles said the court of protection, while examining whether the woman had sufficient mental capacity to refuse treatment, had “invaded their private and family lives and made a finding … that has had a profound effect and impact on [the family]”. | Charles said the court of protection, while examining whether the woman had sufficient mental capacity to refuse treatment, had “invaded their private and family lives and made a finding … that has had a profound effect and impact on [the family]”. |
| Four media groups – Associated Newspapers, Times Newspapers, Independent News and Media, and the Telegraph Media Group – had argued that journalists should be allowed to identify the woman now she had died. | Four media groups – Associated Newspapers, Times Newspapers, Independent News and Media, and the Telegraph Media Group – had argued that journalists should be allowed to identify the woman now she had died. |
| There are no recent precedents involving an inquest being held where the person who died has not been named. | There are no recent precedents involving an inquest being held where the person who died has not been named. |
| Reporting restriction orders that related to court of protection cases which involved serious medical treatment issues could extend beyond the death of the subject of those proceedings, the judge said. There was “no presumption or default position” that such orders should end on death. | |
| Lawyers representing one of the woman’s daughters have argued that C should remain anonymous in death – to protect her relatives’ rights to private and family life. | Lawyers representing one of the woman’s daughters have argued that C should remain anonymous in death – to protect her relatives’ rights to private and family life. |
| Laura Hobey-Hamsher, a solicitor at the law firm Bindmans who represented the daughter, said: “A 50-year-old woman who had three daughters and a grandchild died. That needs to be remembered … This is not about stifling genuine public debate, but about balancing the risk of harm to (the woman’s) family were her identity to be revealed, against the public interest in doing so.” | Laura Hobey-Hamsher, a solicitor at the law firm Bindmans who represented the daughter, said: “A 50-year-old woman who had three daughters and a grandchild died. That needs to be remembered … This is not about stifling genuine public debate, but about balancing the risk of harm to (the woman’s) family were her identity to be revealed, against the public interest in doing so.” |