"This person suffering from hereditary
defects costs the people 60,000
Reichmarks during his lifetime. People,
that is your money. Read 'New People'."
Posted on 08/25/2005 10:40:32 AM PDT by repubernaught
The parents of a brain-damaged baby have failed to overturn a court order that rules she should be allowed to die if she stops breathing.
Darren and Debbie Wyatt, from Portsmouth, presented a letter at the Court of Appeal from doctors saying Charlotte has made remarkable progress.
The 22-month-old has serious lung, brain and kidney damage.
Doctors at St Mary's Hospital, in Portsmouth, won the legal right not to resuscitate her last October.
Mr and Mrs Wyatt's solicitor, Richard Stein, said: "They are pleased that the court recognised Charlotte's continued improvement.
"The doctor called her improvement remarkable and one of the judges called it astonishing.
"We have the hearing in the autumn when all the evidence will be heard before the court and we are very optimistic that at that point the declaration will be dismissed."
Despite Mr and Mrs Wyatt losing their appeal on Thursday, the three judges at the Court of Appeal said that a review of the case - originally scheduled for October - should be brought forward to look again at the order.
'No error of law'
Mr Justice Hedley, who granted the original order, had said he did not believe "any further aggressive treatment, even if necessary to prolong her life, is in her best interests".
Charlotte's parents challenged that decision in April but failed, leading to the latest appeal.
On Thursday, after a full-day hearing, Lords Justices Laws, Wall and Lloyd ruled that Mr Justice Hedley had "made no error of law" and rejected the Wyatt's appeal.
On the steps of the High Court in London, Pat Forsythe, Portsmouth Hospital Trust spokeswoman, said: "It is not a case of winning or losing. 'Signs of improvement'
"Our doctors and nurses, who have spent so much time caring for Charlotte, share the pleasure of her parents that she has some sense of sight, some sense of hearing and that she is showing signs of improvement with her breathing.
"However, Portsmouth Hospital Trust is content that the Court of Appeal today has upheld the right of our clinicians not to ventilate Charlotte if they judge it would not be in her best interests.
"We would assure her parents, the courts and the public as a whole that indeed our doctors and nurses will continue to give Charlotte the best possible quality of care for the foreseeable future."
Do they have the right to change hospitals?
The article does not say who is paying for the care, but it probably falls back to the hospital. The people who demand the most from health care seem to be the same ones that don't have any money or any insurance. If they had either, I don't doubt that they would find somewhere else to take the child.
My mistake. I see that it is from the BBC now. That means that the taxpayers are paying. The sky is the limit.
Actually, that means the government is the final arbiter of life and death and apparently they have spoken. The baby dies.
One of the "benefits" of a government run health care system.
I think this depends on the condition of the child. If the child has a terminal illness, then the doctor's are correct that they shouldn't prolong the child's life.
The only other issue hear is that someone besides the parents are paying. It is one reason I am glad that I have private insurance, and worst case is that we can also pay for care for awhile with our own money.
My twin daughters both almost died when they were 6 weeks old. One of them was a on a ventilator for 10 days, and one of them was on a ventilator for a month. I know it was hard for us to make rational decisions during this time. I know on New Year's eve, one of my daughters took a turn for the worst. I couldn't even listen to the doctor. The doctor started talking about having to put my daughter on a heart/lung machine. I literally had to leave the room. Thank God, the doctor had started my daughter on a blood transfusion and my daughter started doing better the next day. I know I could not have made the decision to take her off the ventilator even if it was in her best interest. I emotionally would not have been able to make that kind of decision.
I feel very sad for the parents and the doctors in this case.
There is a time and a place for everyone to die. Unfortunately, modern medicine can delay that beyond any reasonable expectation. I have a living will, but I hope that when the time comes that no one will try to prolong my suffering. I hope that I never take the easy way out and prolong anyone elses suffering.
That should be the parents' decision.
If the parents can pay for it, then it should be their decision.
If the parents cannot pay for it, then it should be the decision of who is paying for the care.
A person can be left on life support for a very long time, and it is very expensive.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.