Nineteen-year-old Sudiksha Thirumalesh, who was a victim of a rare mitochondrial disease, died a few weeks ago after doctors at a hospital in the United Kingdom condemned her as “delusional” for wanting to try an experimental treatment that might, or might not, have helped.

But that very issue now is going before an appeal court after Lady Justice King said, “There is a real prospect of an appeal succeeding and there are compelling reasons for these important issues to be considered by the Court of Appeal.”

Doctors and courts in recent years in the U.K. literally have ordered the deaths of multiple individuals with those rare diseases, deciding for them that there is no possibility of help, so they should be deprived of treatments and left to die. In several cases those doctors and courts even have forbidden patients to be moved overseas for treatment.

Among the victims of the agenda are Charlie Gard, Alfie Evans, Archie Battersbee and Indi Gregory.

A report from Christian Concern said the ongoing fight is over those making such life-or-death decisions.

The teen died as a result of the position adopted by Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, a part of University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust.

Sudiksha suffered from a rare genetic mitochondrial disease, but was “still fully conscious and able to communicate with her own lawyers, explaining that she wanted to pursue the opportunity of specialist treatment in Canada. The treatment was her only chance of survival,” the report said.

Hospital officials, however, claimed that while “Sudiksha’s prognosis was uncertain and she could have survived for some months, her condition was deteriorating, and she was therefore ‘actively dying.’”

They demanded court permission to adopt a “palliative care plan” that deprived her of treatment, so she died.

Before that, two psychiatric experts had examined Sudiksha and told the court that she was not suffering from any mental health illness and had the mental capacity to make decisions about her own medical treatment, the report said.

She expressed a desire to take part in clinical trials of nucleoside therapy that have been going on in Canada, and might have given her a chance of survival.

“While she realized that the experimental treatment might still fail to save her, she said that she ‘wanted to die trying to live,’” the report said.

Doctors called her choice “delusional,” and demanded she accept her death as imminent.

It was Mrs. Justice Roberts who earlier rejected the advice of multiple mental health experts, and claimed, “Sudiksha is unable to make a decision for herself in relation to her future medical treatment, including the proposed move to palliative care, because she does not believe the information she has been given by her doctors.”

Christian Concern explained, “Sudiksha grew up in a tightly knit Christian family who spent all their savings to pay lawyers to resist the legal proceedings brought by the NHS to end her life. Despite her illness, she attended a regular school, achieved good GCSE results and was studying for her A levels when her health deteriorated after catching COVID in August 2022. She was taken to an Intensive Care Unit and remained there until her death.”

Her father, in a statement, said, “We are relieved to have the opportunity to appeal Mrs Justice Robert’s ruling. The ruling and restrictions left us and Sudiksha powerless and trapped. It was clear overreach from the NHS and courts, and we are determined to do everything we can for it to be overturned.”

Andrea Williams of the Christian Legal Centre, explained, “The public is rightly concerned to know the truth about Sudiksha’s disturbing case and death. Now these restrictions have been lifted the case can be brought fully into the light.

“The attempt to justify those restrictions by fears of harassment or violence against the clinicians does not hold water. There is no evidence of such a risk in cases of this kind – certainly not in this case.”

Williams added, “The frequent use of court orders in end-of-life cases, which threaten families in the middle of tragedy with being criminalised if they break them, are being weaponised to silence criticism and accountability of hospitals and the NHS.”

This article was originally published by the WND News Center.

This post originally appeared on WND News Center.