Brightwater Care Group (Inc) v Rossiter

[2009] WASC 229

Supreme Court of Western Australia

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Medical Law
2. › Consent to medical treatment
3. › Right to refuse treatment
4. › Mentally competent patient
5. › Direction to cease life-sustaining treatment
6. › Whether care provider obliged to comply
7. › Whether care provider criminally responsible for ceasing treatment
1. Medical Law
2. › Palliative care
3. › Administration of analgesics
4. › Whether criminal responsibility arises where palliative care occasion arises from patient's refusal of life-sustaining treatment
5. › Criminal Code (WA), s 259(1)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Duty to provide necessaries of life
3. › Interpretation of 'having charge' of another
4. › Whether duty applies where patient has mental capacity to direct own care
5. › Criminal Code (WA), s 262
1. Criminal Law
2. › Surgical and medical treatment
3. › Defence to criminal responsibility
4. › Ceasing to administer treatment
5. › Whether reasonable having regard to patient's state and all circumstances
6. › Criminal Code (WA), s 259(2)
7. › Acts Amendment (Consent to Medical Treatment) Act 2008 (WA)

Quick Take

A mentally competent patient in Western Australia has the right to direct cessation of life-sustaining medical treatment, including nutrition and hydration provided through a PEG tube. Section 262 of the Criminal Code (WA) does not impose a duty to provide necessaries of life against the wishes of a competent patient. Section 259(2) provides a complete defence to criminal responsibility for ceasing treatment in accordance with a competent patient's informed decision. Care providers have a duty to ensure the patient is fully informed of the consequences before acting on such a direction.