Tim Baldwin was instructed by Ramsdens Solicitors
Tim Baldwin represented QM’s husband, GE, in significant Court of Protection proceedings concerning the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment from QM, a 33-year-old mother of two who had suffered a catastrophic hypoxic brain injury following a cardiac arrest.
Both QM and GE are part of the Irish Travelling Community.
In Mid Yorkshire Teaching NHS Trust v QM & Anor [2026] EWCOP 22 (T3), Mrs Justice Theis DBE was asked to determine whether it was in QM’s best interests for invasive ventilation and clinically assisted nutrition and hydration to be withdrawn and replaced with palliative care. QM’s husband and wider family opposed the application based on her deeply held Roman Catholic beliefs and values, which informed her wish to continue to receive life-sustaining treatment.
The Court accepted the evidence of QM’s husband and family that her faith was central to her identity and that she would have wished every possible opportunity, however small, to remain alive and recover. Mrs Justice Theis DBE described GE’s evidence as ‘powerful and compelling’ and accepted that QM’s deeply held religious beliefs and values formed an important part of who she was and were relevant considerations under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
Applying the best interests framework set out in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Aintree University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust v James, the Court undertook a holistic assessment of the medical evidence, QM’s wishes, feelings, beliefs and values, and the sanctity of life.
Although the Court ultimately concluded that the considerable and increasing burdens of treatment outweighed its benefits, it emphasised the importance of giving significant weight to QM’s religious beliefs and the views of those closest to her when determining what was in her best interests.
The Judge also gave great credit to the family and praised the Irish Travelling Community for the support they had given the family during this time.
The judgment provides an important illustration of the Court of Protection’s approach to best interests decisions in life-sustaining treatment cases, particularly where deeply held religious beliefs and values are engaged. It also serves as a reminder that questions of medical futility must be considered alongside the individual’s own values, beliefs and understanding of the sanctity of life.
To instruct or contact Tim Baldwin please email: contactmyclerks@gclaw.co.uk
