Skip to main content
Live Action LogoLive Action
Hospital IV drip with vitamins, minerals and fluids intravenously through saline tubes.
Photo: Aekprachaya Ayuyuen/Getty Images

HORRIFIC: UK judge orders nutrition and hydration withdrawal from disabled man

Icon of a globeInternational·By Cassy Cooke

HORRIFIC: UK judge orders nutrition and hydration withdrawal from disabled man

A judge in the United Kingdom (UK) has ordered that nutrition and hydration should be removed from a 28-year-old disabled man against the wishes of his family.

Key Takeaways:

  • In 2020, the patient — identified only as FHR — suffered a catastrophic brain injury that left him severely disabled.

  • For five years, he lived under his mother's care until the Court of Protection ordered his removal to a care home in 2025.

  • His mother, identified as FN, was barred from seeing him for 16 months.

  • Mr. Justice McKendrick has now ruled that FHR should be deprived of nutrition and hydration until his death, which witnesses say is an indescribably horrific way for someone to die.

The Backstory:

According to the Christian Legal Centre, which is representing FN, FHR suffered a catastrophic hypoxic brain injury in 2020, leaving him in a state of "Prolonged Disorder of Consciousness." For five years, FN cared for FHR in her own home, until in 2025, the Court of Protection ordered his removal to a care home.

This was allegedly so an assessment of his neurological condition could be conducted, but FHR was never returned to his home.

Never miss the latest news in the fight for life.

Shortly after being removed from her care, FN raised concerns about the quality of care FHR was receiving, and eventually had to call for an ambulance when staff refused to act, even as she pointed out his oxygen saturation levels were dropping.

It turned out she made the right call; FHR was suffering from aspiration pneumonia.

"In four-and-a-half years at home, including in hospital settings, there was no pneumonia," FN said. "Three days of being in the care home, he’s got aspiration pneumonia."

The NHS seemingly retaliated by blocking her from being able to see him at all for 16 months.

"When I arrived to see him, I was asked to leave and told the police would be called, so I left and that was it," she said. "Since that day, I’ve not seen my son in that care home."

Zoom Out:

Some experts say this is not unusual.

Jacqui Shurlock, CEO of the Challenging Behaviour Foundation (CBF), which supports children and young adults with severe learning disabilities, told the Daily Mail:

"We just don’t know how far this extends; there’s no figures or database. But our sense is that more and more people are experiencing contact orders. There’s a definite tendency towards blaming parents when they raise concerns.

I can’t comment on this case but we know from past cases, parents who have raised legitimate complaints have had orders placed on them."

Hanna Whitehead, a lawyer who specializes in the Court of Protection, agreed, and said care homes use the orders as a way to avoid dealing with the relatives of their patients:

"It’s becoming increasingly prevalent. I’ve worked in this area for quite a while and I’ve never had so many orders come through where contact has been restricted.

It’s easier for care homes that way because they just don’t have to deal with it. As care homes are private property, they are the landlords and they do technically have the right to restrict who can enter onto the property.

I don’t want to tar them all with the same brush; there are very reasonable care homes and carers out there, and there are family members that are problematic. But you do see cases where family members have raised concerns and carers get to the point where they don’t want to deal with this person any more, so they just restrict contact."

Throughout this ordeal, FN has fought efforts to have her son declared brain dead, which would allow for him to be more hastily killed. "He experiences life. He experiences love," she said. "He can hold his head up, he can focus… He’s not a vegetable. He’s not brain dead."

The Details:

In a new press release, the Christian Legal Centre announced that Mr. Justice Kendrick has ruled that FHR is in a "vegetative state" and should be denied nutrition and hydration until his death.

In addition, Kendrick said keeping FHR alive would cause him to live in "an existence of distress." FHR, he claimed, has "such limited consciousness and communication that his life is devoid of comfort or pleasure. There is little prospect of that ever changing.”

But FN had expert testimony saying that FHR is not in a vegetative state.

Dr. Judith Allanson, an expert in neurorehabilitation and prolonged disorders of consciousness, said that not only is FHR not in any pain or distress, but that he has the potential to regain brain function.

Allanson said he smiled when his father talked to him about football, the World Cup, and his favorite team, Arsenal. She additionally said his level of consciousness could be due to heavy sedation, and that he should receive a tracheostomy and have his sedation medications reviewed before determining what his mental status might be.

But Kendrick denied the accounts from FHR's family and from Allanson, saying, “FHR’s devoted parents and sister – and the wider family – yearn for responses and reaction and of course, naturally, they must hope and pray for awareness and some form of pleasure. Love has the power to impair our objectivity. There is no reliable evidence before the court of awareness leading to joy, comfort or pleasure.”

Rehabilitation consultant Ajoy Nair said “spending more time, effort and resources, and tinkering with his medications when he has a catastrophic brain injury are meaningless." Nair recommended that Kendrick withdraw FHR's nutrition and hydration.

FN released a statement in response through her lawyers:

"I do not want to prolong my son’s life artificially, but it is unacceptable to bring about his death in the way the system has done. Even murderers and rapists do not get death sentences from the court, but my son now has it – for no other crime than being severely disabled.

All I wanted was for my kid to be allowed to live naturally and to die naturally.

The system has treated my son with unbelievable cruelty. My son was stable and happy at home, he was surrounded by love from his family, and I believe his condition was gradually improving.

The system then abducted him, locked him up, isolated him from his family, ruined his physical health, drugged him up with sedatives, and has now obtained a court order to starve him to death.

I believe that ending his life was always their agenda and the only thing standing between death and my son was the love and protection of his family – so that was brutally removed by force.

It is probably too late now to save my son, but if so, the system which has done this to him should be held to account."

The Big Picture:

Dying through the deprivation of nutrition and hydration, even with palliative care, is not a peaceful, compassionate death.

Bobby Schindler, the brother of Terri Schiavo, knows what it’s like to see a loved one killed in this manner despite a family's battle to save them. This is precisely what happened to Schiavo, who, despite a massive effort to save her, was sentenced to slowly die, deprived of food and water over a period of 13 days. Schindler described the horror of his sister’s final days:

After almost two weeks without food or water, my sister’s lips were horribly cracked, to the point where they were blistering. Her skin became jaundiced with areas that turned different shades of blue. Her skin became markedly dehydrated from the lack of water. Terri’s breathing became rapid and uncontrollable, as if she was outside sprinting.

Her moaning, at times, was raucous, which indicated to us the insufferable pain she was experiencing. Terri’s face became skeletal, with blood pooling in her deeply sunken eyes and her teeth protruding forward. Even as I write this, I can never properly describe the nightmare of having to watch my sister have to die this way.

What will be forever seared in my memory is the look of utter horror on my sister’s face when my family visited her just after she died.

The Bottom Line:

It is acceptable to remove someone from life support to allow them to die a natural death. But food and water is not life support; it is basic life-sustaining care that every human being requires to survive.

Slowly starving and dehydrating someone until they die is horrific and should never be allowed.

Live Action News is pro-life news and commentary from a pro-life perspective.

Our work is possible because of our donors. Please consider giving to further our work of changing hearts and minds on issues of life and human dignity.

Contact editor@liveaction.org for questions, corrections, or if you are seeking permission to reprint any Live Action News content.

Guest Articles: To submit a guest article to Live Action News, email editor@liveaction.org with an attached Word document of 800-1000 words. Please also attach any photos relevant to your submission if applicable. If your submission is accepted for publication, you will be notified within three weeks. Guest articles are not compensated (see our Open License Agreement). Thank you for your interest in Live Action News!

Read Next

Read NextLaura Karlen
Human Interest

Her own miscarriages led her to help other women who lose their preborn children

Lisa Bast

·

Spotlight Articles