Archie Battersbee’s life support can be withdrawn today after a court rejected a last-minute appeal from his family.
The United Nations had asked for plans to stop the brain-damaged 12-year-old’s treatment to be delayed while it looked into his case at his parent’s request.
Archie’s family had turned to the UN after the High Court ruled it was in Archie’s best interests to turn off life support and all routes of appeal had been exhausted.
The UK’s Court of Appeal rejected the UN’s request on Monday, saying doctors would be allowed to stop treatment from Tuesday midday.
This short delay would allow Archie’s parents to make any further application to the Supreme Court, a judge said.
Doctors initially planned to stop treating Archie from 2pm on Monday but agreed to wait for the ruling before taking any action.
Archie has been in intensive care since April, when he suffered a brain injury during an incident at home which his mother believes could have been linked to an online challenge.
Doctors want to stop treating the child, who they believe is brain-stem dead, but his parents want his life-sustaining treatment to continue.
Court of Appeal judge Sir Andrew McFarlane described Archie’s condition on Monday, saying: “In short, his system, his organs and ultimately his heart are in the process of closing down.
“The options [to be considered by] the court have always been stark.”
These “options” have been to either to withdraw treatment immediately - resulting in Archie’s death a short while later - or to allow him to die at some time in the coming weeks while receiving treatment, which his parents describe as a time “chosen by God”.
He added: “The choice, awfully, is about how he dies. There is no other option. It is how he dies in the coming weeks.”
All three appeal judges ruled unanimously on Monday to reject the UN’s request to postpone hospital plans to switch off life support while its Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities assessed the case.
The lead judge said there was “really nothing of substance or merit” in favour of a “stay”, which would prevent the removal of life-sustaining treatment.
Edward Devereux QC, the lawyer representing Archie’s family, had told the court it would be “complicit in a flagrant breach of international law” by refusing the UN’s request.
But this argument was rejected by the Court of Appeal, which found the relevant international treaty was not incorporated into domestic law.
Claire Watson QC, a lawyer for Archie’s guardian – an independent adviser appointed to represent him – said there has been no change to her client’s view that it was no longer in his best interests for treatment to continue given Archie’s “parlous” condition.
Sir Andrew said the case was “very strongly in favour of refusing a stay” when considering the 12-year-old’s welfare.
“Every day that he continues to be given life-sustaining treatment is contrary to his best interests,” he ruled.
The Court of Appeal judge conclude “there should be no stay granted other than a short stay now for the parents to take stock and consider if they want to make any further application to the Supreme Court”.
