Robert Barnor had his life-sustaining treatment withdrawn against the wishes of his family and tragically died in February 2026
What’s at stake?
- Every human life has inherent dignity and value, regardless of disability, dependency, or level of consciousness. Even profound disability must never be treated as a reason to end someone’s life.
- Food and fluids should not be withdrawn from a vulnerable patient when the consequence of that decision is death, especially when the courts haven’t fully considered the possibility of improvement, the patient’s responses, and the evidence of those who know and love the patient best.
- Families should be heard and treated with compassion when such serious decisions are made about their loved ones.
- Open justice and public scrutiny are vital safeguards in end-of-life cases. Transparency Orders should not prevent families from seeking support, prayer and proper public scrutiny while these life-and-death decisions are being made.
- Disabled and incapacitated people must be protected from decisions which judge their lives to be futile, burdensome or without sufficient pleasure. The law should protect vulnerable patients rather than place their lives at greater risk.
Timeline
2025
7 April: Robert Barnor, 68, was admitted to St Helier Hospital Intensive Care Unit after being found collapsed at home following a stroke.
July: His neurological condition improved and he was successfully weaned off life support ventilator. However, the doctors told the family that because of severe brain damage suffered by Mr Barnor, it was in his best interests to die, and threatened to take the family to court unless they agreed to a withdrawal of treatment. An intensive care consultant allegedly told the family: “I regret keeping him alive at the start.” However, from July 2025, the Hospital resists the family’s requests to provide medical records and brain scans to substantiate that view, or to obtain an independent opinion from a neurologist.
November: The National Clinical Lead for prolonged disorders of consciousness, Professor Turner-Stokes, advises the Trust to refuse Mr Barnor’s life-sustaining treatment as a unilateral “clinical decision” and to avoid making reference his “best interests”, as the matter would mean the dispute with the family had to be resolved in court. Without ever seeing the patient or considering his medical records, Professor Turner-Stokes recommended that the Hospital’s records should be “amended” to change Mr Barnor’s diagnosis from “minimally conscious state” to “terminal decline of consciousness” so as to avoid the need for “detailed assessment and prognostication” required in the clinical guidelines which apply to minimally conscious state.
2026
January: The central line through which dialysis was provided to Robert Barnor becomes blocked, and the doctors insert a temporary line for short-term use.
February: Robert’s family race against time to save the life of their husband and father after being informed by the NHS solicitors of a decision to withdraw life-sustaining treatment immediately – despite the strong opposition from his family and without asking permission from the High Court. Supported by the Christian Legal Centre, the family instructs lawyers to take the unusual step of making their own urgent application for the High Court to determine whether it is in Mr Barnor’s best interests to receive life-sustaining treatment. Such applications are usually made by NHS Trusts against the families.
17 February: the Vice President of the Court, Mrs Justice Theis, refussd permission to bring proceedings on the grounds that the Court had no power to interfere with clinical decisions. The family appealed.
23 February: The Court of Appeal allowed the family’s appeal and remitted the case to another judge for an urgent hearing to determine whether re-starting dialysis was in Robert’s best interests.
27 February: Robert Barnor dies.
8 March: The Court of Appeal rules it was illegal for St Helier Hospital to withdraw life‑sustaining dialysis from 68‑year‑old Robert Barnor on 11 February 2026, despite the objections of his family and without seeking the court’s approval.
April: The family of Robert Barnor forces a dramatic retreat by the Faculty of Intensive Care Medicine (FICM) after threatening urgent High Court action.
July: Un a rare development, the Supreme Court grants permission to both Robert Barnor’s family and Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust to appeal in the case of Townsend v Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust.
Media coverage
- Telegraph: NHS trust accused of ‘acting like the mafia’ after ending father’s life-support
- GB News: Hospital found to have broken law after withdrawing life-sustaining treatment and letting patient die
On our website
- 16 February 2026: Family in fight to save father’s life after NHS stops life-sustaining treatment
- 9 March 2026: Hospital broke the law in withdrawing life-sustaining treatment
- 13 April 2026: Christian family forces U-turn on life-sustaining guidance
- 27 July 2026: Supreme Court to hear landmark NHS end-of-life case
Support Robert’s family
Robert’s family is receiving help from the Christian Legal Centre to take his case forwards.
We provide this support completely free of charge to Robert’s family and others like them.