The parents of 12-year-old Archie Battersbee have lost a Supreme Court bid to block the withdrawal of his life-sustaining treatment.
The country’s top court has dismissed the family’s application to appeal the Court of Appeal’s decision yesterday to remove his life support.
His parents, Hollie Dance and Paul Battersbee, have sought to extend his treatment to allow time for a United Nations committee to consider the child’s case.
They were granted a last-minute hearing on Monday after the government asked the Court of Appeal to urgently consider a request from the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to keep treating Archie.
But after considering the case, appeal court judges refused to postpone the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment by Barts Health NHS Trust and said there would be a short stay put in place until 12pm today.
This afternoon, Supreme Court judges said they have “great sympathy with the plight of Archie’s devoted parents who face a circumstance that is every parent’s nightmare – the loss of a much-loved child”.
But they added: “There is no prospect of any meaningful recovery.
Man charged with intending to injure or alarm the Queen on Christmas Day at Windsor Castle
Thumbs up from Princess Charlotte as she watches swimming at Commonwealth Games
Liz Truss U-turns on public sector pay plan after backlash from Conservatives
“Even if life-sustaining treatment were to be maintained, Archie would die in the course of the next few weeks through organ failure and then heart failure.”
Archie has been at the centre of a lengthy legal dispute since he was seriously injured in an incident at his home in Southend, Essex, in April.
Ms Dance found her son unconscious with a ligature over his head. She believes he took part in an online challenge.
He has not regained consciousness and has been kept alive via life support treatment.
The High Court previously ruled Archie’s treatment should come to an end because doctors treating him at the Royal London Hospital in Whitechapel, east London, said he was “brain-stem dead”.
The Court of Appeal upheld that decision and the Supreme Court refused to give the family more time to carry on their fight.
His family insisted the treatment should continue, saying the youngster’s heart was still beating and he had gripped his mother’s hand.
His parents claim that stopping treatment would be in breach of the UK’s obligations under Articles 10 and 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities, and Article 6 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Children.
These international obligations say states must take all necessary measures to ensure disabled people enjoy equal rights and that governments should do all they can to prevent the deaths of children and young people.
