King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust v South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust & Anor [2024] EWCOP 20

Capacity and best interests decision concerning GF and whether he should have his ulcerated leg amputated. 

GF is 60 and has a history of paranoid schizophrenia. He was admitted to hospital via A&E after being taken there  by his niece, AB. and GF was reported to be disorientated. His niece had noticed sores which he said were caused by lasers and Wi-Fi but, on examination, were caused by infection and necrotic. Without amputation, the sores would be fatal. A mental health review found GF to be delusional.

After reviewing the law on capacity and best interests, Henke J first decides GF lacks capacity and then notes the medical evidence is unanimous that an above the knee amputation is the only feasible route to save GF's life. She therefore decides the surgery is in GF's best interests partly as has expressed a desire to live. She also sets out her reasons for publishing the judgment at [13] one of which is so that GF has a record of why his leg has been amputated. 

Read the judgment on Bailii