Parents of brain-damaged baby lose fight to keep him on life support

The boy’s parents are “deeply disappointed and disheartened” by the High Court decision

The now five-month-old baby was first declared brain-dead in June (Getty Images/iStockphoto)

The parents of a baby boy suffering from brain damage have lost their legal battle to keep him on life support.

On Wednesday, a High Court judge ruled that ending his treatment was lawful and in the best interest of the five-month-old boy, who has been on life support since June.

His parents are said to be “deeply disappointed and disheartened” and hope to appeal the decision.

The child was first found unresponsive in June when he was around two months old. Doctors concluded that his brain had been starved of oxygen for over 30 minutes and he had suffered “devastating” brain damage.

He was declared brain-dead but remained on a ventilator as his parents were unhappy with the diagnosis and took legal action. A nurse later noticed the boy trying to breathe.

But since then, specialists treating the baby - who is on a ventilator - say he has suffered a “catastrophic” brain injury, has no prospect of recovering, and should be removed from life support and given only palliative care.

In an appeal of an earlier judge’s decision to end his treatment, at the Family Division of the High Court in London, Mr Justice Poole reconsidered evidence and concluded that treatment was “futile”.

Solicitor Amy Rowe, who represents the couple, said on Friday: “My clients and their family members are understandably deeply disappointed and disheartened by the decision and they are hoping to appeal.”

The boy’s parents pleaded with the judge for more time so their son could “make progress”, or for “Allah to intervene”.

This is the second High Court fight the couple has lost, with Mr Justice Hayden previously deciding the boy’s treatment should end.

Lawyers representing specialists at Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, which is responsible for the boy’s care, had asked for decisions about what was in his best interests.