ABSTRACT
Mr W, a 77-year-old man with end-stage dementia lacked capacity to make decisions about his treatment. Admitted to hospital in September 2017 with an acute illness, a nasogastric tube was passed to enable his enteral feeding. Within 2 months, he was well enough to return home, but his discharge was delayed due to a disagreement with his family. During the ensuing court hearing to settle where Mr W's best interests lay in the dispute over nasogastric feeding at home, it was agreed that Mr W should be discharged to the care of his sons, with domiciliary clinical support. On appeal, the court noted that the High Court judge had taken careful account of evidence of Mr W's wishes, feelings, beliefs and values. The court found that the patient's best interests had precedence over the family's (undoubtedly well-intentioned) insistence that tube feeding must continue after discharge.
