Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think that the words the BBC used about Charlie Gard were upsetting and wrong?

92 replies

PyongyangKipperbang · 27/06/2017 23:01

The reporter said "......whether ending Charlies life ....."

No one is ending his life! He is being allowed to die and that is a very different thing.

Surely this language shouldnt have been used to describe the withdrawal of life support?

OP posts:
StillDrivingMeBonkers · 27/06/2017 23:03

www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/

AwaywiththePixies27 · 27/06/2017 23:03

I'm assuming that was them talking about the courts discussing it.

Crass I know. But still.

Original poster
PyongyangKipperbang · 28/06/2017 00:06

THey were but still, the language they used was very misleading and unpleasant.

OP posts:
MrsJayy · 28/06/2017 00:10

Poor Charlie it is heartbreaking words used can really stick with you and I think you are right ending his life just doesn't sit right does it.

FelixtheMouse · 28/06/2017 01:51

It's an accurate description.

Shadow666 · 28/06/2017 01:59

I think "allowing him to die" is much more offensive. All of us have our life supported in some way, just some more than others. Obviously Charlie is at the far end of the scale but I personally believe we all have the right to live, or die, unfortunately Charlie is not in a position to be able to make that decision for himself.

Reow · 28/06/2017 06:47

They're not ending his life.

They're withdrawing treatment to free him from suffering.

The alternative is to allow him to continue suffering with no hope of recovery.

Birdsgottaf1y · 28/06/2017 07:02

I've got mixed feelings.

They block the trip to the US because it would be proglongling his life and therefore suffering and the blocking did such that. But also added to his Parents distress and that of the public.

Depending on your beliefs, Charlie is alive and withdrawing his treatment will end his life.

It's bought about interesting debates about profound disabilities and who deserves to live and die, especially with two people now being denied the right to die, during this very sad situation.

Birdsgottaf1y · 28/06/2017 07:06

""They're not ending his life.
They're withdrawing treatment to free him from suffering.
The alternative is to allow him to continue suffering with no hope of recovery.""

But the Courts decision isn't consistent on what they deem suffering and who they will allow treatment to be withdrawn from. Hence not having the right to die.

TooStressyForMyOwnGood · 28/06/2017 07:15

I agree, language is important in things like this (and I am someone who normally rolls my eyes at language and grammar complaints). The BBC is not the best at reporting health issues in general unfortunately. StillDriving, thanks, I will use that link.

stopfuckingshoutingatme · 28/06/2017 07:19

I think it's great that You care and wanted to point this out OP

BalloonSlayer · 28/06/2017 07:31

The direct result of the actions they are taking - withdrawing his life support - will be the ending of his life.

Totally accurate use of words as far as I can see.

Poor Charlie, and his Mum and Dad Flowers

Wonderment · 28/06/2017 07:44

He doesn't look like is is currently suffering. He looks like a peaceful baby. If they think the treatment won't work they should have allowed the parents to at least try it. They have to grieve him all their lives after all.

Ceto · 28/06/2017 07:56

Wonderment, he isn't capable of "looking like" he is suffering because he is so badly brain damaged. That doesn't mean he isn't, and I think those experts who actually look after him day to day may know more about it than people diagnosing from photographs, don't you? There was no point in increasing his suffering by shipping him across the world because even the person who originally offered the treatment ultimately admitted it could not possibly benefit Charlie.

brexitstolemyfuture · 28/06/2017 07:59

I'm just heartbroken over the whole incident, I donated early on to the campaign and wish he had of had the treatment espically as they think he felt no pain.

AnchorDownDeepBreath · 28/06/2017 08:03

Brexit the medical opinion is that he does feel pain; he just can't show it.

Needanewaura · 28/06/2017 08:16

I think it's a desperately sad situation. And my heart truly goes out to the parents. But sometimes those closest to someone terribly sick are not the right people to make these awful decisions. I prefer to trust the decisions of those doctors whose lives are dedicated to helping sick children and to preserving life wherever possible, to make the decision in this case. I am absolutely sure it wasn't taken lightly and I think doctors tend to err on keeping life going artificially when people are suffering, rather than withdrawing with no regard to the person or the family. There have been so many safeguards in this case, with each legal processs agreeing with the previous one, when they have all the facts.

All those people who were saying, keep fighting hun, and all babies deserve to live, have not helped the parents come to terms with this terrible tragedy, but have just made it worse for them.

brexitstolemyfuture · 28/06/2017 08:37

That's not my understanding from what I have read.

How many times have people recovered after doctors wanted to turn off the ls system? Thousands of times!

Heratnumber7 · 28/06/2017 08:40

They're not ending his life.
They're withdrawing treatment to free him from suffering. The alternative is to allow him to continue suffering with no hope of recovery

They aren't giving him treatment either. There is no treatment for his condition. They are artificially keeping him alive when he can't see or hear or eat or, I think, breathe for himself. They are just going to stop doing that.

Wonderment · 28/06/2017 08:44

I think those experts who actually look after him day to day may know more about it than people diagnosing from photographs, don't you?

Not necessarily, no, and I'll tell you why. I worked for decades in various NHS hospital settings and have been involved in many decisions such as this.

Experts and carers sometimes follow a philosophy. They make judgements about quality of life. These judgments aren't always accurate or agreed upon by those closest to the person in question. You may argue they are not best positioned to objectively view the person, but I would argue they are. They have an invested interest that someone judging their quality of life does not.

Anyway, it's pointless discussing it really. The law has decided and that's it. But I wish they hadn't. Look at that laddie with the JW parents who whisked him off to Spain for treatment not offered in the U.K. "Experts" inferred it would be dangerous to his health but the parents knew best. I think if a parent feels that strongly, give them a chance. It wouldn't take long to find out they were wrong, would it? And what if, just what if, they could be right?

TolpuddleFarterOATB · 28/06/2017 08:54

Obviously we're not privy to what went on in the courts, but I am interested in how they have decided Charlie is "suffering." Surely they won't know if he's feeling pain or not?

x2boys · 28/06/2017 09:52

i think its a very tragic situation i have a child with significant disabillities and can understand to some extent his parents love and devotion and their son alive at whatever cost but i dont think there was ever going to be a happy ending i really feel for all involved

Ceto · 28/06/2017 15:42

Brexit, the relevant question here is how many people have recovered from brain damage. And the answer is - absolutely none.

This child is effectively paralysed, he cannot eat for himself, and even the doctor in the US admitted that he could not change any of that. Keeping him alive would be to keep him in a situation where he is already in pain and that will get worse, because with the best will in the world when someone is in that situation the doctors cannot prevent their muscles from wasting away and their joints contracting. Would you really want that for your child?

Ceto · 28/06/2017 15:45

Wonderment, please don't tell me you seriously believe that you know more than all the doctors involved in this case, and all the judges who have spent hours going through all the reports and questioning those doctors. Bear in mind that the parents have not managed to find one single doctor who supports this treatment - even the one who offered it in the first place. And you seriously contend that you know better than any of them? Your nickname is singularly apt.

VladmirsPoutine · 28/06/2017 15:50

I think it's an accurate statement. Using flowery language does not render this situation any less heartbreaking. It is effectively 'ending' his life.