What was the patient’s statement regarding amputation in the case Re C [1994]?

In the case Re C [1994], the patient's statement, “I would rather die with 2 legs than live with one,” highlights a significant aspect of patient autonomy and decision-making regarding medical treatment. This statement reflects the patient's strong preference for maintaining their bodily integrity and conveys a deep personal conviction about the value of their limbs and their quality of life. It emphasizes that for this patient, living with an amputation was perceived as a lesser quality of life compared to facing mortality with their existing limbs.

The case centers around the principle of informed consent and the importance of a patient’s wishes in medical decision-making. In this context, the patient's statement serves as a clear expression of their desires regarding treatment options, particularly in a situation where amputation was considered due to medical necessity. It speaks to the broader legal framework concerning a patient's rights to make informed choices about their own health care.

Understanding the significance of this statement is crucial in health law, as it underlines the need for healthcare providers to respect and uphold the values and preferences of patients, even when those preferences may seem contrary to medical advice. The implications of such statements go beyond individual cases, impacting healthcare policy and ethics in the broader landscape of medical treatment and patient rights.