Abstract
The recent decision in Re A (Conjoined Twins: Medical Treatment) [2001] 1 FLR 1 to separate 'Jodie' and 'Mary' might have far-reaching implications. Despite the Court of Appeal's protestations to the contrary, the ruling, and in particular the reasoning regarding 'best interests' and the lawfulness of separation, must have set a precedent. Perhaps most problematically, it appears that the court's reasoning can be employed to justify killing one patient in order that some other(s)might benefit from the resources currently devoted to her or him. This logically required extension might not be met with such a radical ruling in practice; nevertheless, its very possibility presents a threat to legal coherence, in view of the obvious conflict with other legal principles.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
