Isaiah Haastrup: Family in legal battle to stop brain-damaged baby’s life support being switched off

Father banned from visiting his son in hospital over incident where police were called

Isaiah Haastrup with his aunt Dahlia Thomas (PA)

The parents of an eight-month-old baby are waging a legal battle to stop his life support being switched off by doctors in London.

Specialists at King’s College Hospital say giving further treatment to Isaiah Haastrup would be “futile, burdensome and not in his best interests”.

But the boy’s parents, Takesha Thomas and Lanre Haastrup, have refused to let his ventilator be switched off and are seeking the opinions of independent experts.

Mr Haastrup has also been banned from visiting Isaiah following an incident where police were called earlier this month.

Fiona Paterson, representing King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, told the Family Division of the High Court relations between hospital staff and Isaiah’s parents were difficult.

She said Mr Haastrup had been banned as a result of an incident on 3 November, adding that the prohibition would remain in place “until we are satisfied his behaviour will improve”.

But the baby’s father told Mr Justice MacDonald that there was no violence involved.

“Police were simply called by [hospital staff] for breach of the peace,” he added. “I am not a saint but I am not a demon either, as is being portrayed.”

Mr Haastrup said there had been a ”lack of care“ for Isaiah and told journalists outside the court in London that he was considering seeking a judicial review of the hospital’s ban, although his application for that review was declined.

Isaiah has been on life support since being born with brain damage thought to have been caused by oxygen deprivation on 18 February, and remains in a paediatric intensive care unit.

King’s College Hospital accepts his condition was partly contributed to by a delay giving his mother an emergency caesarean, but said the main reason was a rare event where her womb ruptured during labour.

Ms Thomas is represented by lawyers in the case but Mr Haastrup told the court he would be representing himself after being unable to obtain legal aid.

Another judge previously suggested parents embroiled in cases over their children should always receive government help to find lawyers, following huge cuts to legal aid spending.

The Ministry of Justice is reviewing budget reductions started by the Coalition Government in 2012, which have been decried by the judiciary, barristers, human rights groups and politicians, who say family courts have been particularly affected.

While considering the case of Charlie Gard, another severely ill baby whose life-support treatment was switched off following a high-profile court battle between his parents and Great Ormond Street Hospital, Mr Justice Francis said people in the same position should always have access to lawyers.

“It does seem to me that Parliament ... cannot have intended that parents in the position that these parents have been in should have no access to legal advice or representation,” he said earlier this year.

“I can think of few more profound cases than ones where a Trust is applying to the court for a declaration that a life-support machine should be switched off in respect of a child.”

He added: “I am aware that there are many parents around the country in similar positions where their cases have been less public and where they have had to struggle to represent themselves.

“I cannot imagine that anyone ever intended parents to be in this position.”

Mr Justice MacDonald is expected to make a ruling on Isaiah’s treatment following a trial starting on 15 January, unless a resolution is found through mediation.

He has made an order barring staff caring for Isaiah, whose family home is in Peckham, south-east London, from being identified in media reports.

Additional reporting by PA