http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-New ... 9191?f=rss

Raises a lot of questions doesn't it...

It certainly does, as does Sir Wall's eyebrows...

Seriously, I didn't think you could be forced by law to have surgery???

Just recently a 15 year old Jehovah's Witness died because he refused to receive blood after an accident. Apparently it was up to the doctors to decide if he was able to make a mature decision based on his beliefs and condition.

The doctors in this case are convinced she will die if she doesn't have the operation, but what are the chances of her dying within a couple of years if the cancer metastasizes. What will her quality of life be if she feels she has been violated and goes on to die?

Even if it's true that she's incapable of making that choice (which in itself is always open for debate) who is the judge to make that choice. Surely it should be a close family member. What I find most disturbiung about this though is the doctors attitude. Who are they to try and force medical procedures on someone. Aren't they supposed to respect peoples opinions?

Perhaps she's decided that 55 years is long enough for her and has refused treatment as a form of "DNR"?? Maybe she doesn't want treatment because she's had enough of other people interfering in her life and taking away what liitle decision-making power she has??

This kind of thing makes me sick and makes me very glad that I have a living will and all my family/loved ones know how I feel.

I've come across situations similar to this, though not requiring court intervention. It's not simple nor clear-cut.

This lady has a learning disability. She doesn't have capacity - she cannot retain the information, process it ans express an opinion based on the information given. Hence she cannot make a decision.

Compare it to a five-year-old kid who doesn't want surgery because she is scared of big hospitals. Let's say she has appendicitis and if she isn't operated on, she will die. This five year old would not have capacity to make a decision. Hence the parent/guardian makes the decision on the kid's behalf.

Except here, there is no parent/guardian but the person is still incapable of making a decision. Hence a "higher power" is required to help make the decision.

Similar to but not the same as a person with advanced Alzheimer's dementia.

I would have thought that the family are thinking long term as to how they do they look after in her old age as they are even older.

What if she has no family or next of kin?

I see quite a few elderly people who were only children or whose family have all died, are the sole remaining member and have no children or friends to act as NoK? Who, then, is there to act in the best interests of the person?

Well, it’s not going to help her phobias either, is it?

Shouldn't someone who is incapable of making a decision have a guardian, even if it is the state?

Her family can be that guardian, but as she is getting on they are aware of what will happen when her parents die and she is alone.