Posted on 07/10/2017 7:47:36 PM PDT by Nextrush
A lawyer for Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH) has dismissed claims of "fresh" medical evidence in the case of terminally ill baby Charlie Gard (BARF).
GOSH referred the case back to the High Court after reports of "new" data from foreign health care experts suggested treatment could improve his condition.
Charlie's parents have made several unsuccessful challenges to a decision to end the 11-month old's life support.
GOSH told the hearing the evidence was not new but it was right to explore it.
Mr. Justice Francis is overseeing the preliminary hearing in the Family Division of the High Court.....
Francis is due to resume the hearing on Thursday.
On Sunday, Charlie's parents Chris Gard and Connie Yates handed in a 350,000-signature petition calling for him to travel to the US for treatment.....
Lawyers representing the family have now said using "cutting edge genetic science" there was a "small chance" of brain recovery and that it was a chance "worth taking"....
Charlie's parents, from Belmont in West London, want their son to have nucleoside therapy.
Speaking to BBC Breakfast, Ms. Yates described the situation as a "living hell"......
"I think parents know when their children are ready to go and they've given up, and Charlie is still fighting.
"It's horrible that this decision has been taken out of our hands. It's not just about us knowing best, it's about having other hospitals and doctors saying we want to treat (Charlie) and we think it's the best thing to do.".........
(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.com ...
President Trump committed himself with the tweet last week offering help in Charlie Gard's case.
He obviously does not control the British government or courts and overall wants better relations with the UK.
I understand the judge in this case, Justice Francis of the High Court, took a shot at President Trump in the hearing today.
Well if this judge the hospital's lawyers and hospital officials participate in putting Charlie Gard to death as the process unfolds I hope the USA does respond.
Making Charlie a US citizen and getting him out has been suggested. I have no objection.
If that is not possible I would like to see the banning of the above individuals involved in killing Charlie from entry into the United States.
The UK has banned folks like Michael Savage from entering their country.
Its time for a principled response.
The people making these decisions have addresses.
L
The parents have to prove their case? This is sick. This is what government totalitarianism, fueled by socialism, looks like. I’ve met with the GOSH administrators. Pompous morons, on their best day.
Dr Charles krauthammer tonight on Fox said that this child,s condition is tragic, and the child in his condition is in agony and the best for the child would be to let him die,
Kraft hammer felt the hospital that wants to bring the child here is grandstanding for publicity. If it were his baby, kraut hammer said he would not take the child anywhere else, it’s torture for the child.
He added though it should always be the parents choice in the end.
He put a whole different perspective on it.
This is what Sarah Palin spoke of:
Death Panels
Don’t let it happen here.
But they should be denied entry into the USA permanently if they follow through with their deadly intentions.
No Florida vacations, medical conferences in this country, legal conferences etc. etc.
A quick and principled response from Washington.....
Ending futile care does not kill anyone. They already have a terminal condition that we are artificially prolonging. Just because we can do something does not mean we should
Prolonging death and causing pain and misery is not a path I would take. However if the parents want to continue and they can pay for it it is up to them. I wonder though if they are doing this for their child or themselves. I frequently find in these situations the motives are more selfish than thinking of the best interest of the patient.
What I don't understand in all this is how the UK can prevent the parents from taking the child out of the country or why they would want to.
Thank you for saying this. Keeping a shell-body alive is a form of torture.
A very thoughtful post.
I would qualify “selfish”.
These are desperate parents who are having a hard time letting go of their child...understandable. And sometimes in these situations, a quack, or even a reputable hospital for their own selfish reasons, takes advantage of parents,
Prolonging life artificially is bizarre, if there is no further treatment option.
You don’t have to work in an ICU long to realize just how much torture it really is In the short term for someone with an excellent chance of meaningful recovery it can be a good thing all though not all would opt for if. Long term with little chance of recovery is truly torture
If the parents are paying (or have private donors), yes they should have 100% say so. However, if the taxpayer is responsible for the bill (or part) than the door to Government intrusion has been opened.
Selfish takes on many levels. For these poor parents their need to have their child with them no matter the cost outweighs the needs of the child Understandable and heart wrenching but still selfish on some level
I have seen it more blatant There are those that the attention and pity it brings from others becomes a means in and of itself. I have also seen people put their loved ones through this long term because as long as they are alive the disability or social security check comes every month Those folks are beyond reprehensible
Earlier case where parents defied the Brit authorities
Discussion of this is several paragraphs, below a group of tweets, in the Daily Mail article linked in comment #33.
The parents received around $1.4 million pounds in donations to finance travel and treatment.
Miracles do on occasion happen. I wonder though how most people arguing for continuing this would feel if they were asked if they wanted to be kept alive on life support unable to see, talk, move, eat or even breathe on their own for a year for a minuscule experimental chance of “some improvement” I certainly would not.
The baby is not suffering.
You should listen to explanation of someone who visits him regularly and has 2 children. She knows.
If the baby has any awareness he is suffering. Ask people who have been onife support for short periods of time Most do not ever want it again regardless of the circumstances. Just because someone visits regularly doesn’t mean they understand the full extent of the treatments and level of discomfort Most visitors are asked to step out when interventions are done
Again imagine not being able to see talk eat breathe or even move an arm or leg a little bit of you were u comfortable. And being trapped that way for a year. You can’t seriously say there is no suffering involved.
We can have a discussion about whether we think prolonging treatment is right or wrong, it you can’t ignore the reality of the treatment
If Baby Charlie is murdered,
his parents should name names of doctors, nurses, administration staff
and lawyers involved in Charlie’s murder.
We already know the name of the High Brow Court Judge.
If Charlie is murdered, expose the ones who participated
and yes...ban them from entering our country.
withdrawing futile care is not murder. You need to ask yourself is the care prolonging life or prolonging death? Just because we have the technology to do things does not mean it is right or moral to do them.
If the parents want to continue and can pay for it, which they apparently can, then they should by all means be allowed to. But I pity the poor child.
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.