Airedale NHS Trust v. Bland [1993]
[1993] AC 789 · House of Lords · United Kingdom
Issue
Could treatment be lawfully withdrawn when continuation was not in the patient's best interests?
Held
Yes, with court approval on the facts.
Exam use
Review the ratio and reasoning before applying this case in problem questions.
Summary
Leading end-of-life decision-making case.
Facts
Issue
Could treatment be lawfully withdrawn when continuation was not in the patient's best interests?
Held
Yes, with court approval on the facts.
Ratio Decidendi
Life-sustaining treatment may be withdrawn where it is not in the patient's best interests, subject to legal safeguards.
Reasoning
Essay-Ready Explanation Generator
Version 1 of 4
Reference to Airedale NHS Trust v. Bland ([1993] AC 789) strengthens a bioethics law answer because the case reflects the principle that Life-sustaining treatment may be withdrawn where it is not in the patient's best interests, subject to legal safeguards. Applied to a problem question, the case should be used after identifying the issue as Could treatment be lawfully withdrawn when continuation was not in the patient's best interests? The stronger essay move is to connect the material facts to the court's holding, then explain whether the present facts support the same conclusion or justify distinguishing the authority.
Significance
Related Cases
No related cases listed.
Exam Tips
Revision Checklist
- Name the issue before discussing facts so the marker sees the legal question immediately.
- State the holding in one sentence, then use the ratio to explain why the court reached that result.
- Use the citation and jurisdiction to show why this authority matters for the problem you are answering.
- Pair this case with one supporting or contrasting authority if the question tests limits, policy, or exceptions.