Re A (children) [2000] 4 All ER 961
Judgement for the case Re A (children)
Table Of Contents
There were 2 conjoined twins, J and M. If they remained conjoined then both would die, while if they were separated only M would die.
CA say doctors have a duty to preserve M’s life (i.e. not operate), and duty to save J’s life (i.e. operate).
-
There is a clear difference, regarding necessity, with Dudley and Stephens since in that case Defendant was the judge as to the value of his own life as compared with others.
In this case the doctors could make an impartial judgement and therefore decide on the basis of necessity/duress of circumstance that it was worth operating so that at least J would survive.
RELATED CASES
For Further Study on Re A (children)
Medical Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridg...
A collection of the best GDL notes the director of Oxbridge Notes (an O...
Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get StartedRelated Product Samples
These product samples contain the same concepts we cover in this case.
| Medical Law | End Of Life Notes (15 pages) |
| GDL Criminal Law | Murder Notes (3 pages) |
Criminal Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambrid...
Since 2010, Oxbridge Notes has been a trusted education marketplace, supplying high-quality materials from top achievers at universities like Oxford, Cambridge, LSE, Harvard, and Yale.