Mother is suing the NHS over baby’s Down’s syndrome

A mother suing the NHS over the ‘wrongful birth’ of her Down’s syndrome baby would have aborted her son after she saw first-hand how ‘disabled people suffer’ in society, a court heard today.

Edyta Mordel, 33, conceived her son Aleksander ‘accidentally’ with partner Lukasz Cieciura and initially ‘was not at all happy about it’ even before she knew of his disability, the High Court was told. 

Miss Mordel is suing the NHS for more than £200,000 for the additional cost and hardship of raising Aleksander, now four, who was born by caesarean section at the Royal Berkshire Hospital in 2015.

The mother, who lives in Reading, said she believed she had been given the all-clear after having screening to check for signs of Down’s syndrome in the unborn baby, whereas medics had recorded her as declining to take the test.

Judge Mr Justice Jay said the guidelines on ‘informed consent’ do not explain what is needed to acquire this, adding: ‘It depends.’

NHS lawyers claim that there is not sufficient evidence to suggest that Miss Mordel, who is originally from Poland, would have terminated her pregnancy even had she known of Aleksander’s condition.

Miss Mordel (right) is suing the NHS for the additional cost and hardship of raising her son

But her barrister Clodagh Bradley QC said while Miss Mordel now ‘has her son who she does care for’ she had previously experienced the difficulties disabled people face in society and would not have wished to put her child through that.

She said:  ‘She gives an anecdote of why she couldn’t bear to have a child with Down’s syndrome. She said ‘I knew someone from work with Down’s syndrome.

‘I knew how difficult his life is. I would not have continued with my pregnancy. I knew how disabled people suffered, and what people said about him and how they acted towards him. I would not have wanted my child to suffer like that’.’

Ms Bradley also told Mr Justice Jay that Ms Mordel would not have been deterred from having a termination by her Catholic faith. She was not devout and had previously used contraception and ‘not attended mass regularly’, the barrister said.

Ms Bradley added: ‘This was a 28-year-old who had fallen pregnant accidentally and wasn’t at all happy about it when she first met the midwife.’

She also told the court that Miss Mordel and the baby’s father, Mr Cieciura, ‘remain a couple’ and insisted they would have made a ‘joint decision’ to terminate had they had the screening.

The boy was born by caesarean section at the Royal Berkshire Hospital in Reading in 2015

Miss Mordel’s case is that she thought she had undergone the Down’s syndrome test on her unborn baby.

Focusing on the role of the midwife who attended Miss Mordel’s 16-week appointment after a sonographer had noted her as declining the test, Ms Bradley told the judge: ‘It was negligent for the midwife not to review, discuss and record the ultrasound scan report.

‘One of the purposes of the 16-week appointment is to effectively act as a failsafe. That is the window of opportunity’.

Ms Bradley told the judge that the medical professionals should have ensured that they had the mother’s ‘informed consent’ to skip the Down’s syndrome screening at that vital 16-week meeting, especially since English is not her first language.

‘The need to ensure there’s an understanding between professionals and patient is further increased when you have a patient who is not a native English speaker’, she said.

Mr Justice Jay, reserving his ruling until a later date, said it was an ‘important’ case legally and he would take time to consider his decision.

‘This case will possibly attract a lot of attention when it comes to judgement because it raises important issues in relation to informed consent and the NHS in relation to a very important area’, he said.

‘What is clear is that the national guidelines do not explain what is needed to acquire informed consent. The answer is: It depends,’ he added.