UK markets closed
  • FTSE 100

    6,483.43
    -168.53 (-2.53%)
     
  • FTSE 250

    20,910.37
    -287.75 (-1.36%)
     
  • AIM

    1,183.25
    -8.61 (-0.72%)
     
  • GBP/EUR

    1.1537
    +0.0039 (+0.34%)
     
  • GBP/USD

    1.3921
    -0.0091 (-0.65%)
     
  • BTC-GBP

    34,075.00
    +755.72 (+2.27%)
     
  • CMC Crypto 200

    912.88
    -20.25 (-2.17%)
     
  • S&P 500

    3,811.15
    -18.19 (-0.48%)
     
  • DOW

    30,932.37
    -469.64 (-1.50%)
     
  • CRUDE OIL

    61.66
    -1.87 (-2.94%)
     
  • GOLD FUTURES

    1,733.00
    -42.40 (-2.39%)
     
  • NIKKEI 225

    28,966.01
    -1,202.26 (-3.99%)
     
  • HANG SENG

    28,980.21
    -1,093.96 (-3.64%)
     
  • DAX

    13,786.29
    -93.04 (-0.67%)
     
  • CAC 40

    5,703.22
    -80.67 (-1.39%)
     

Judge orders OAP receive COVID vaccine despite son's objections

Emily Cleary
·3-min read
Close up of general practitioner hand holding vaccine injection while wearing face protective mask during covid-19 pandemic. Young woman nurse with surgical mask giving injection to senior woman at hospital. Close up of nurse holding syringe to vaccine old patient from covid19.
A court has ruled an 80-year-old care home resident must receive the coronavirus vaccine despite her son objecting (Stock picture: Getty images)

A court has ordered that an 80-year-old care home resident should receive the coronavirus vaccine despite her son objecting.

The woman, known only as Mrs E in court papers, has dementia and was diagnosed with schizophrenia around 20 years ago. She has lived in a London care home since March last year.

On 8 January the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham informed Mrs E's family that she was to be offered a COVID-19 vaccination on 11 January. However, W, Mrs E's son, objected by email.

As a result of the objection, Mrs E was not vaccinated and her representatives in the care home urgently sought a declaration - under section 15 of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 - to the effect that it would be lawful and in Mrs E's best interests to receive the vaccine at the next possible date.

One hundred year-old Ellen Prosser, known as Nell,  receives the Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine from Dr Nikki Kanani at the Sunrise Care Home in Sidcup, south east London on January 7, 2021. - A mass rollout by GP practices of the Oxford/AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine has begun, as hospitals across the United Kingdom face rising numbers of seriously ill patients. (Photo by Kirsty O'Connor / POOL / AFP) (Photo by KIRSTY O'CONNOR/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)
A mass rollout of coronavirus vaccines in Britain's care homes began in December (Kirsty O'Connor/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)

A mass vaccination programme with the priority of immunising care home residents was launched in Britain in December.

In the weeks following the son’s objections a number of confirmed COVID cases were reported in the Care Home.

The honourable Mr Justice Hayden ruled that Mrs E should receive the vaccine, it being in her ‘best interests’.

“In determining what would be in Mrs E's best interests, I am required to consider, so far as is reasonably ascertainable, her past and present wishes and feelings, the beliefs and values that would be likely to influence her decision if she had capacity, and any other factors she would be likely to take into account if she were able to do so,” said the judge.

“Mrs E had, prior to her diagnosis of dementia, willingly received the influenza vaccine and is also recorded as receiving a vaccination for swine flu in 2009. I consider the fact that, when she had capacity, Mrs E chose to be vaccinated in line with public health advice, to be relevant to my assessment of what she would choose in relation to receiving the COVID-19 vaccine today.”

Watch: 7.8 million have received first dose of coronavirus vaccine

He continued that “while Mrs E lacks the capacity to consent to receiving the vaccine, she has articulated a degree of trust in the views of the health professionals who care for her by saying that she wanted ‘whatever is best for me’”.

The court heard how Mrs E’s son is “deeply sceptical about the efficacy of the vaccine, the speed at which it was authorised, whether it has been adequately tested on the cohort to which his mother belongs, and, importantly, whether his mother's true wishes and feelings have been canvassed”.

However, Justice Hayden said that the circumstances surrounding Mrs E - taking into account her age, residence, diagnosis of diabetes and lack of understanding - meant “her vulnerability to becoming seriously ill with, or dying from, Covid-19” was high, so receiving the vaccine was in her best interests.

Read more

What you can and can't do under current lockdown rules

The judge ruled: “It is a fact that Mrs E lives in a country which has one of the highest death rates per capita, due to COVID-19, in the world.

“By virtue of her vulnerabilities, the prospects for her if she contracts the virus are not propitious; it is a risk of death, and it is required to be confronted as such. The vaccination reduces that risk dramatically and I have no hesitation in concluding that it is in her best interests to receive it.

“I would add that, in the light of the COVID-19 outbreak at the home, I consider that Mrs E should receive the vaccine as soon as practically possible.”

Last week the UK was revealed to be the most pro-vaccination country in the world, with 81% of people saying they would accept a coronavirus vaccine if offered.

Watch: What is long COVID?