The family of a Christian woman who was removed from life support despite their objections is condemning the decision as a violation of her wishes. Her children say her religious convictions and right to life were disregarded by a court order.
Hyacinth McIntosh, 54, was removed from life support and denied hydration against her wishes and beliefs, her family has said, according to the U.K.-based group Christian Concern.
A Court of Protection ruling last November authorized McIntosh’s ventilator, feeding and hydration to be withdrawn, leading to her death on Dec. 25, 2024. Legal documents state that McIntosh had been in a coma since May, when she experienced a heart attack followed by severe brain damage.
McIntosh’s family repeatedly voiced objections to the withdrawal of artificial hydration, pointing to her Christian faith and her stated view on “the sanctity of life,” according to The Telegraph.
Her daughter, Shanika Davis, said the entire experience, including a refusal by clinicians to provide fluids, compounded their grief. “How my mother died was beyond cruelty. There was no dignity or respect, and we refuse to believe that it was in her ‘best interests’ to die.”
She added, “Our wishes as a family and my mother’s right to life have been trampled on by the hospital and the courts.”
McIntosh was kept alive by artificial ventilation and nasogastric feeding until Dec. 14, when these life-saving methods were removed pursuant to the court order, according to court documents. Despite a last-minute legal challenge, these devices were removed.
McIntosh continued to breathe on her own until she died on Christmas Day. Davis said physicians had predicted her mother would not survive more than a few days after ventilation ended but said McIntosh’s “oxygen saturation between 95 and 100 percent at all times” showed otherwise.
McIntosh’s Christian convictions meant she would have wanted to remain on life support, leaving the final outcome in what they said would be “God’s hands,” said the family.
Doctors and judges “condemned her to a cruel death from dehydration” rather than revisiting their earlier conclusions, Davis was quoted as saying. She said the family was unable to seek alternatives, including potential transfer to a different medical facility, because the Court of Protection had placed reporting restrictions on the case.
King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust carried out the withdrawal of artificial ventilation, feeding, and hydration immediately following the court decision. A spokesman for the trust was quoted as saying that continuing treatment was not in her best interests.
McIntosh’s daughter obtained the support of professor Sam Ahmedzai, a retired palliative care physician who had contributed to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines on end-of-life care. In his evidence to the Court of Protection, Ahmedzai called the denial of fluids “cruel, inhuman and degrading.”
He further noted, as quoted by the Telegraph: “There is no justification for withdrawing existing nasogastric hydration and feeding in such a case, even after withdrawal of assisted ventilation. Even if, after extubation, [McIntosh] lives for only a matter of days, then removal of the NG tube would be an unnecessary and unusually cruel, degrading and inhuman thing to do.”
Ahmedzai added that some healthcare providers still practice elements of the abolished Liverpool Care Pathway, which involved withholding hydration from dying patients.
Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, which is Christian Concern’s legal arm, said: “This story raises the specter of how vulnerable patients and families will be treated under any ‘assisted dying’ legislation. It’s highly concerning. Good law protects life, does not blur boundaries and should never promote death.”
McIntosh’s relatives are pressing to have “dehydration” listed as her immediate cause of death, but they have been informed it will not appear on her death certificate.
