A 15-year-old girl has been ordered to undergo lifesaving cancer treatment against her wishes after the hospital recommending the therapy took her to court.
The girl, referred to as JJ in a written judgment, was diagnosed with B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia in 2022 and went into remission after chemotherapy and immunotherapy treatment at the Royal Children’s Hospital in Victoria.
However, in August 2024 she developed a secondary leukaemia called therapy related myeloid neoplasm.
Her doctors recommended a haematopoietic stem cell transplant, also known as a bone marrow transplant. Without it, the girl and her mother were told she would only have a 5 per cent chance of survival, possibly even less.
But both rejected the treatment plan. The girl because she believed the “treatment was worse than the cancer”, and the mother, referred to as HH, because she believed JJ’s “last final cure” would be through God, not the hospital.
Transplants come with risks, including graft versus host disease, infertility and can negatively impact other organs including the heart, lungs, kidneys and brain. It also comes with a risk of death that can range up to 30 per cent in certain cases.
After JJ and her mother refused to consent, the girl’s doctors brought an urgent application to the Supreme Court of Victoria seeking authorisation to carry out the transplant under the legal provision of parens patriae — where the state acts as guardian for individuals who cannot protect themselves.
Both the mother and the girl fought the court application, however, it was supported by the girl’s estranged father.
During her initial treatment phase, JJ suffered a stroke and seizures, one of which required ventilation. JJ also suffered from a number of infections. After a torrid time of nearly 12 months in hospital over two years she went into remission.
However, in 2024 doctors detected a second, therapy-related myeloid neoplasm. Her brother was identified as a bone marrow match, but HH refused to allow it to go ahead in December 2024.
After five months without treatment, JJ relapsed in May 2025 and received two rounds of “salvage” chemotherapy and is currently in remission, however the myeloid neoplasm is still present in her bone marrow.
A doctor who had been sought for a second opinion agreed a bone marrow transplant was JJ’s “only real chance of being cured” and without it she would succumb to her disease.
‘Spiritual consequences’
HH, however, told medical staff she believed her daughter had been cured and that there would be “spiritual consequences for the person who consented to it”.
When told that the hospital could apply to the Supreme Court for an order authorising the treatment, HH said that if that occurred, she would “accept the court’s decision, even if she disagrees with it, because any negative consequences would be faced by the court, rather than by herself”.
After skipping several meetings to discuss JJ’s treatment, HH sent a text message to a nurse consultant stating JJ’s “last final cure” would be through God, not the hospital. She wrote the “precious blood of Jesus” had “flushed out the evil” in JJ’s body.
In meetings with a child psychologist, JJ admitted she knew that she needed a transplant and wanted to live but was so angry with her treating team that she wouldn’t “make it easy for them”, and would require the hospital to go ahead with an application to the court.
She was angry the hospital had contacted her estranged father and spoken to them about her treatment.
‘Treatment worse than cancer’
JJ’s lawyer told the court that after years of hospital care, she believed the “the treatment is worse than the cancer” and she was “just exhausted”.
In the judgement handed down on April 9, Justice Andrea Tsalamandris found JJ did not have the maturity to make an informed decision about her care, saying her anger with hospital staff was impeding her capacity to sensibly evaluate the clear advice being given to her.
“In considering the whole of the evidence before me, and exercising the necessary caution, I am satisfied that JJ’s best chance of survival is to have the recommended treatment whilst she is in remission, “ Justice Tsalamandris wrote in her judgment.
“JJ has suffered complications from the treatment she has received to date, including a stroke and seizures. I accept that JJ is currently feeling well, and does not want to undergo further medical treatment, which will make her feel unwell, will isolate her from her family and friends, and have her miss school, and possibly, the school production.”
“HH and JJ’s concerns as to the impact the treatment will have upon JJ’s school and social activities, are genuine, and understandable. However, such consequences are short term only.
“In considering this application, I have given priority to the sanctity of life. To give JJ the best chance possible of leading a full life, including her desire to be part of future school productions, and her dream of attending university, I am satisfied that whilst JJ remains in remission, the recommended treatment should be provided, as a matter of urgency.”
Get the latest news from thewest.com.au in your inbox.
Sign up for our emails