Posted on 07/26/2017 1:45:28 PM PDT by Morgana
Charlie Gard’s mother Connie Yates today left a courtroom in tears after the judge in the case said Charlie would have to die in a hospice if his parents and the London Hospital that has been refusing to treat him properly can’t come to an agreement over where he will be when his life support is removed.
Charlie’s parents have been fighting with the hospital over whether or not they can take him home so he can be surrounded by friends and family after he is removed from life support. However the hospital has refused to allow him to go home — saying that it doesn’t think his ventilator would be able to fit through the front door of his house.
Charlie’s say they have found a doctor willing to look after the 11-month old boy so they can spend time with him at home away from the hospital during his final days but Judge Francis says Charlie will die in a hospice unless both sides can agree.
That prompted an emotional response from Yates.
Here’s more:
CHARLIE Gard’s mum has today fled the court in tears as a judge confirmed the tot will die in a hospice unless a deal is struck with Great Ormond Street by midday tomorrow.
Connie Yates – who is at the High Court alone – began crying and shouting “what if it was your child?” before leaving the hearing this afternoon.
A High Court judge was set to announce his decision on where Charlie will end his life after his parents and hospital lawyers took on a new legal fight – if the hospital and parents could not reach an agreement.
Fiona Paterson, a lawyer representing GOSH said the situation could not carry on and said “this cannot drag on into another day”.
After Mr Armstrong asked for 48 more hours to find an intensivist [board-certified physician who provides special care for critically ill patients] who can take care of Charlie, the judge said the indecision between the two groups is “compounding” the parents’ misery.
He said he was hoping for an agreement to be reached today and said: “I have gone out of my way to accommodate the parents’ wishes.”
He said he might give the parents until 12pm tomorrow to try to reach an agreement, but said there must be a “default position” if they cannot agree.
On Monday, Connie Yates and Chris Gard decided to end the legal battle to get their son experimental treatment. Based on new evidence, the couple said Charlie’s condition has deteriorated too much and there no longer is any hope of the treatment working.
Their final request to a judge this week was to be allowed to take Charlie home to die. The 11-month-old British infant has a rare mitochondrial disease and brain damage. His parents and Great Ormond Street Hospital have been in a months-long legal battle over his treatment.
“We promised Charlie every day we would take him home. It seems really upsetting, after everything we’ve been through, to deny us this,” his mother said.
Keep up with the latest pro-life news and information on Twitter.
London High Court judge Justice Francis is expected to rule on the request today, according to the Daily Mail.
The hospital opposes the parents’ request. Its lawyers argued that Charlie needs to stay at the hospital or go to a hospice facility until he dies. Doctors claimed his ventilator will not fit through the door of his parents’ home, and he could suffer a painful death.
The 11-month-old British infant has a rare mitochondrial disease. His parents and Great Ormond Street Hospital have been in a months-long legal battle over his treatment.
His mother told Good Morning Britain previously that she does not want her son to suffer. She said it has been “absolute living hell” to wait and wonder when the hospital might end his life support.
“He’s our own flesh and blood and we don’t even have a say in his life whatsoever,” Yates said. “We are not bad parents, we are there for him all the time, we are completely devoted to him and he’s not in pain and suffering, and I promise everyone I would not sit there and watch my son in pain and suffering, I couldn’t do it.”
Questions remain about whether Charlie could have benefited from the experimental treatment, had it not been delayed for months during the legal battle between Charlie’s parents and the hospital. The court battle began in March.
In the Royal Court of Justice in London, Connie stated, “Charlie was left to lie [in Great Ormond Street Hospital] and deteriorate. We wanted Charlie to have the chance … [there] was never false hope, as confirmed by many experts. Now we’ll never know…” Connie and Chris underscored that they “should have been trusted as parents.”
Despite all of his problems, Charlie’s parents – and millions like them – believe that Charlie is a valuable, living human being who should be given a chance to live.
Leading pro-life advocates helped Charlie’s parents fight for his life.
Charlie’s parents brought Terri Schiavo’s brother Bobby Schindler to London to help them fight for care for their son. Schindler spoke with LifeNews exclusively about their invitation.
Schindler told LifeNews: “We are here by invitation from the family to come alongside them as they struggle to save their son, Charlie. The critical issue here is not a political one, but the simple notion that families know what is best for their loved ones.”
“Charlie’s situation is very reminiscent of my family’s battle to save my sister, Terri. Hopefully being here can help his parents, Connie and Charlie, deal with the day-to-day emotional roller coaster, as they fight for their son’s right to live,” Schindler added.
PAY ATTENTION you Bernie Bots
This is your future unless you mend your ways
Why do you think that the depictions of death have him wearing a black robe?
Let the kid go home to die for Chrissakes. They already prevented him from getting treatment that may have helped. Now they want to prevent the family from bringing their son home to pass away peacefully with family there.
This is what single payer does.
I have some mixed feelings about the parents. But not allowing them to bring Charlie home to die amongst loved ones is beyond cruel. A sick system.
Yet on the evidence it appears it is more the Judge's child than hers; for she is not the one the government put in charge of the matter, and it seems the people belong to the government and the government wants to make it very clear in this example. This is the bargain a people strike when they put the government in charge of caring for their basic needs.
Sorry for this response, but I can only hope this very judge - and obama both have the fortune of this exact life experience.
...and every damned hospital worker and lawyer pleading the NHS case. Monsters, every one.
Single payer (government) insurance means that the payer (gevenment) gets to make the decisions....BAD IDEA DEMOCRATS.
Judge: You're the mother of the child. The state own the child. I will say what is best for the states children.
WHEN, not if, a ‘ruling elite’ cleansing revolution is sparked which will see these tyrants liquidated, it will come from some humble domestic overreach like this case.
Why all the drama and BS? Why didn’t the judge just order an abortion 11 months ago? /s
This is nothing less than the UK’s way of declaring that NHS is equal to US medicine and re-affirming that UK parents are not in charge of their own children. The idea that the state should intervene on behalf of children when their welfare is being neglected by bad parents has evolved to the state having the final say on matters involving children with good parents as well. I thought the UK was a Constitutional Democracy. But it has devolved into a unconstitutional, politically correct nanny state.
What is equally shocking (and more) is the overwhelming opinion of the majority of Brits/UK. I can’t tell if the Daily Mail’s posters portray an accurate reflection of the country as a whole, but these posters passionately support their socialized medicine and doctors AND the gov’t’s right to make these decisions no matter what! This simply amazes me, how they can so wholeheartedly cheer their gov’t’s power over their health and lives. I guess they enjoy their tyranny, being “subjects” of the Queen and all.
GOSH and this judge think they are Gods.
A pox on all of them. Especially since they will not allow
Charlie to die at home.
When the arrogance of lawyers treats human beings as “property of the government”.
We have a massive indoctrinated misunderstanding of truth, when it comes to “what is best to do”.
Too many of us are sheeple who have been politically bred to think by mere appointment to a government position those appointed somehow magically become “the best and brightest authority” to which there cannot be any better opinion. It is intellectual nonsense.
That would be bad enough alone, if not added to that was the state treating human beings as its property. In the current case it’s as if little Charlie Gard is not his parents child at all; just someone owned by the state to do with as it wishes. The case represents an example of how far the intellectual traditions of western civilization have sunk.
Sad for the parents. This is government-controlled healthcare.
Off topic a little, but aren’t the parents MARRIED??? This is so bad if they are not.
This is about people being brainwashed to believe that the people in government are just much more intelligent and compassionate than we mere mortals.
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.