Posted on 08/10/2017 10:07:40 AM PDT by Morgana
FULL TITLE: Charlie Gard’s Parents Receive Hate Emails: You’re “Selfish Frauds” Who “Don’t Give a S— About Charlie”
Connie Yates and Chris Gard just wanted to give their son, Charlie, a chance at life.
For months, they have been battling for the right to take their son to the United States for an experimental treatment and only gave up earlier this week when medical experts said their no longer is any hope for Charlie.
Possibly at their lowest moment yet, the British family said they are receiving hate mail criticizing them for fighting for their son, The Sun reports.
One email shared by Chris Gard called them “despicable and vile” parents who embarked on the court battle for fame and money, not their son. Letter writers also have called them “selfish” and “frauds” who “don’t give a s— about Charlie.”
“A taster of what lovely messages we receive as we prepare for the hardest time in our lives,” Chris Gard wrote when he shared the hate mail. “Thankfully we do receive some nice messages too …”
Keep up with the latest pro-life news and information on Twitter.
Charlie’s parents have been very clear about their intentions. His parents said they knew the chance of the experimental treatment working was slim, but they wanted to try anyway for Charlie’s sake. 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.
Several weeks ago, Charlie’s mother, Connie Yates, told Good Morning Britain that she does not want her son to suffer.
“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.”
Charlie’s parents currently are asking the court to allow them to take their son home to die. It is their last request.
“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.
Earlier today, Connie Yates left the 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 can’t come to an agreement about where he will be when his life support is removed.
The hospital opposes the parents’ request to take Charlie home. 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.
Charlie’s parents have long expressed the desire to be allowed to put him on hospice and take him home to die. However, their first choice was to take Charlie to the United States for an experimental treatment. They raised more than $1.5 million for his medical care.
His parents said they knew the chance of the experimental treatment working was slim, but they wanted to try anyway for Charlie’s sake.
However, the courts and hospital refused to allow them to transfer their son to another hospital. About a month ago, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the hospital can remove Charlie’s life support and allow him to die. However, the hospital later agreed to consider new evidence involving Charlie’s condition before taking him off the ventilator.
But on Monday, lawyer Grant Armstrong said medical experts confirmed that it is too late to treat their son.
The BBC reports Armstrong “told the presiding judge Mr Justice Francis that US neurologist Dr Michio Hirano had said he was no longer willing to offer the baby experimental therapy after he saw the results of a new MRI scan last week.”
Hirano previously said Charlie had an 11 percent to 56 percent chance of benefiting from the experimental treatment. He and a group of doctors examined Charlie last week and gave their expert opinions to the judge.
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.”
The hospital said it and its staff also have been the target of harassment and threats.
**PICTURES OF EMAILS ON LINK...WON'T POST THEM BECAUSE OF LANGUAGE****
TERRIS LIST PING
But...but...but humanity is essentially good!
[[Doctors claimed his ventilator will not fit through the door of his parents’ home, and he could suffer a painful death.]]
Umm- didn’t the doctors remove Charlie from his ventilator in order to murder him?
Nice, in a country where people can prosecuted for ‘hate speech’ when posting something negative on social media about sand n****r terrorists and their hateful so-called ‘religion’.
Socialism is a hateful style of governing. It creates jealousy and animosity from those who expect others to pay for them and shut up about it. Those who are being hateful to the Gard family are just afraid they will have their ‘free (to them) health care’ taken away from them if there is too much of a stink about the lousy care provided by the Government. When I lived in Britain, people would ask me what was the biggest difference between the USA and Britain. My answer, for those who wouldn’t judge me about it, was ‘In Britain, when someone is successful, people will look at him/her and say “why does he/she have all that.....they don’t deserve it” ‘. In the USA, when someone is successful, people will look at them and say ‘if he/she can do it, then I can do it’. People who live off the hard work of others, hate the people who work to provide for the takers. They are jealous of those who have more than they do, even though they cannot be bothered to work for their own existence. Our country is becoming more like a Socialist country, every day. More’s the pity.
Their ordeal revealed just how inhumane leftists really are. Can’t do that, the hive mind must shut you down rather than have such double bad thought crimes!
NAZIs didn’t like the government wasting resources on the terminal and disabled either.
An sad example was provided to Americans of what single payer / government run health care means. We observed a regimented Doctor - Patient relationship, the level of care tightly constrained and layers of bureaucracy...
But what shocked me more than anything else was the reaction of the bureaucracy to not allow Charlie to go somewhere else for treatment. The cost would have been placed on the parents (if not covered by donations), but the cost to the bureaucracy... NO, they certainly couldn’t allow such an affront to their power over people.
Single payer seeks to solve an insurance problem by implementing a healthcare problem.
Going against the tenets of the Left's secular religion (e.g., government as a god including the need for death panels) is a secular sacrilege ... punishable by condemnation (and a little farther down the road, by death).
So sad. Any decent person with basic human compassion would be deeply disturbed by what was done to Charlie and his parents.
Maybe that’s why liberal progressives are so ecstatic that he’s dead.
This kind of hate is what fuels the left.
The Party of Compassion, doing what they do best.
I was pinged, advised to mention that Charlie Hard had no chance. But didn’t I read of American doctors willing to help? I wouldn’t have called them quacks. :(
Pro-aborts view saving the lives of babies like Charlie, or saving the life of someone like Terri Schiavo, as a direct threat.
If there was a return address, I’d go give them a good country ass kicking. Can you imagine someone losing a baby child, and getting mail like this?
I think whether or not he had a chance is immaterial. The parents were precluded from doing what they wanted to do to try to save their child. When cost no longer became an issue, control over the parents seem to supercede care of the child. Just my opinion and possibly a window to what single-payer really is.
This is a case of outright death worship and no nonsense about “choice” or “dignity”.
I’d be willing to bet most of the hate mail comes from NHS employees...
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.