Appeal bid over teen who died during NHS legal fight

Sudiksha Thirumalesh died in September during a legal fight with the NHS

The parents of a teenager who died during a legal battle with the NHS have launched a fresh bid at the Court of Appeal.

Sudiksha Thirumalesh, who had a rare mitochondrial disorder, had been involved in a court fight with University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust over being moved to palliative care before her death in September.

The 19-year-old wanted to raise money for an experimental treatment but a court ruled she had a "complete inability to accept the medical reality of her position", which her parents are now appealing.

The Trust has opposed the appeal, arguing Ms Thirumalesh’s failure to understand information she was given meant she could not make decisions on her medical care.

Bruno Quintavalle, representing parents Thirumalesh Chellamal Hemachandran and Revathi Malesh Thirumalesh, told the Court of Appeal in London that the student had no “impairment of mind”.

He said on Wednesday that she was "a young woman very well aware of what she's facing, very well aware of what the medical treatments entail, and very clear that she rejects the care pathway that the hospital wanted her to accept".

In written submissions, Mr Quintavalle continued: "At root, all that there was... was a disagreement between Sudiksha and her treating clinicians; Sudiksha could make a decision, it was just not the decision that the trust wished her to make."

The barrister said the court’s previous decision significantly expanded the reach of the law about mental capacity.

He said it risked removing capacity from a large class of patients who do not accept their doctors' diagnoses or prognoses.

Vikram Sachdeva KC, representing the trust, said in written submissions that the court had previously considered the medical evidence and the consequences of potential treatment.

Judges had said during the August hearing that the chances of Ms Thirumalesh being able to undergo treatment were “exceptionally slim”.

The barrister continued: "A failure to accept this relevant information as true meant that Sudiksha did not understand all relevant information and therefore was unable to make a decision for herself in relation to her treatment."

The hearing before Lady Justice King, Lord Justice Singh and Lord Justice Baker was due to conclude on Thursday, with a decision expected in writing at a later date.