Archie Battersbee case
Archie Battersbee, a British boy, was the subject of several court hearings between April and August 2022, regarding whether or not to withdraw his life support, after he was found unconscious and subsequently considered to have suffered brainstem death. The courts ruled in favour of Barts Health NHS Trust, and against his parents, and allowed his life support to be withdrawn. Incident On 7 April 2022, a 12-year-old boy, Archie Battersbee, from Southend, Essex, England, was found unconscious by his mother, Hollie Dance, with a dressing gown cord around his neck. Dance performed CPR, and called for an ambulance. The paramedics who attended found that Archie Battersbee had suffered a cardiac arrest and his Glasgow Coma Scale score was three, the lowest possible, indicating "no eye-opening, verbal or motor response". CPR was continued and he was taken to Southend University Hospital. On arrival at the hospital, he had no pulse, before regaining spontaneous circulation around 40 minutes after his mother had found him unconscious. It was believed that Battersbee sustained brain damage during this cardiac arrest, due to a lack of oxygen and blood supply to the brain, and for a sustained period. He was transferred the next day to the Royal London Hospital. Dance stated that she believed Battersbee was taking part in a dangerous TikTok phenomenon known as the "blackout challenge". This claim of a link to TikTok was broadcast on ITV's This Morning, but ITV subsequently apologised, claiming there was no evidence that Battersbee viewed this particular challenge via TikTok and also noting that TikTok does act to remove dangerous content. On 8 November 2022, during a pre-inquest hearing, the Essex's senior coroner Lincoln Brookes said there was no evidence that Battersbee had been taking part in an online challenge. Legal cases Battersbee's parents had refused permission for the hospital to perform brainstem testing. On 26 April, the Barts Health NHS Trust made two applications to the High Court of Justice: one for a Specific Issue Order, under section 8 of the Children Act 1989, that it was lawful for Battersbee to undergo brainstem testing, in accordance with the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges’ 2008 Code of Practice for the Diagnosis and Confirmation of Death, to establish whether he was brainstem dead. The other application, should the first fail, was for the Court to consider whether it was in Battersbee's 'best interests' to continue receiving ventilation assistance. Both requests were opposed by the parents, who had the support of the Christian Legal Centre. A further party introduced to proceedings was Battersbee himself, represented by a guardian appointed by the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (CAFCASS). Subsequent appeals made by the family were heard by the Court of Appeal, and finally by the Supreme Court. The NHS Trust argued that Battersbee's treatment should discontinue as he was considered 'brainstem dead', and thus had no hope of recovery. Battersbee's parents had argued that he "needed more time to heal", and that his own religious beliefs should