A brain-damaged boy should be taken off life support, a High Court has ruled as it upheld a previous decision.
Archie Battersbee’s family have lost their case for doctors to keep treating the 12-year-old, who has been unconscious for three months.
A judge ruled “with profound regret” on Friday it was not in Archie’s best interests to continue treating him.
Mr Justice Hayden also said it was a “tragedy of immeasurable dimensions” what happened to the 12-year-old boy.
Archie was left brain damaged after an incident at home in April, which his family describe as an accident that may have been linked to an online challenge.
The High Court had been asked to decide what was in Archie’s best interests after the boy’s family challenged hospital proposals to turn off his life support.
It previously gave doctors permission to stop treating Archie, ruling the boy had died at the end of May.
But the court was ordered to reconsider the verdict after the boy’s family - who wanted him to be given more time and said his heart is still beating - successfully appealed.
Mr Justice Hayden reviewed evidence at a hearing in the Family Division of the High Court earlier this week.
He ruled on Friday doctors at the Royal London Hospital could proceed with switching off life support.
“This court has to ask itself whether continuation of ventilation in this case is in Archie‘s best interests,” the judge said.
“It is with the most profound regret, but on the most compelling of evidence, that I am driven to conclude that it is not.”
He added: “Accordingly, the court cannot authorise or declare lawful the continuation of this present treatment.”
Mr Justice Hayden said the treatment was intrusive, burdensome and intensive” and had to be “proportionate and purposeful” if there was the chance it could lead to an improvement in the boy’s condition.
“Where, as here, the treatment is futile, it compromises Archie‘s dignity, deprives him of his autonomy, and becomes wholly inimical to his welfare,” he said.
“It serves only to protract his death, whilst being unable to prolong his life.”
A lawyer representing Archie’s parents suggested that they wanted to try to challenge Mr Justice Hayden’s ruling in the Court of Appeal.
Andrea Williams from the Christian Legal Centre, which has been supporting Archie’s family, also said the ruling was “another devastating blow” for the boy and his relatives.
“Sadly, however, this is what we have come to expect from the courts in end-of-life cases,” she said.
Ms Williams added: “What Archie‘s case has shown is that systematic reform is needed to protect the vulnerable and their families in end-of-life matters.
“Parents of vulnerable and critically ill children are being put through the mill at the most traumatic moments in their lives when what they need is compassion, support and respect from the NHS and the legal system.”
Delivering his ruling, Mr Justice Hayden said arrangements can now been made that “afford Archie the opportunity for him to die in peaceful circumstances and in the embrace of the family he loved”.
The judge had been told earlier this week doctors believed they would only “delay the inevitable” by continuing to treat Archie, who had suffered a “devastating” brain injury.
Martin Westgate QC, who was representing hospital bosses, told the court on Monday Archie was “unresponsive” and had “no prospect” of recovering.
He said specialists do not think it in the youngster’s best interests for treatment to continue.
But a barrister representing Archie‘s parents, Hollie Dance and Paul Battersbee, from Southend, Essex, said they hoped their son would “make some sort of recovery”.
Ian Wise QC argued that continued treatment is not “futile” and that Archie would want a “natural” not a “choreographed” or “planned” death.
More follows...
