The Supreme Court exercised its parens patriae jurisdiction to authorise a haematopoietic stem cell transplant for a 15-year-old child with leukaemia, overriding both the mother's religiously-motivated refusal and the child's own opposition. The Court found the child lacked Gillick competence because, although she intellectually understood her medical situation and acknowledged needing the transplant, her anger toward her treating team impeded her capacity to rationally evaluate competing short-term and long-term goals. On the best interests analysis, the Court held that the sanctity of life and a roughly two-in-three chance of 10-year survival with treatment outweighed the significant risks of the procedure (including 10-30% mortality), the mother's religious beliefs, and the child's concerns about school and social disruption, while also granting liberty to apply regarding fertility preservation and in the event of relapse.
The full text is available to signed-in members.