Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Would you end your childs life?

102 replies

muckypup73 · 03/07/2017 09:12

After the case of little Charlie, I came across a facebook post about little Nancy, anyway I will take off the newspaper what it says.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/real-life-stories/begged-judge-end-sick-daughters-4509235.amp

Nancy was born blind with hydrocephalus, meningitis and septicaemia. It meant she could not walk, talk, eat or drink and spent hours screaming in agony

They must have been the hardest words any mother could ever have to imagine about her child.

But devoted Charlotte Fitzmaurice bravely wrote them down and handed them to a High Court judge to win for 12-year-old daughter Nancy what she believed she needed most.

To put an end to her suffering – and finally to be at peace.

Nancy was born blind with hydrocephalus, meningitis and septicaemia. It meant she could not walk, talk, eat or drink.

Her quality of life was so poor she needed 24-hour hospital care and was fed, watered and medicated by tube.

As her health deteriorated, she spent hours screaming in agony despite the morphine and ketamine she was given.

For Charlotte too, the pain of seeing her daughter suffering like this was too much to bear.

So after 12 heartbreaking years, she went to court to fight for Nancy’s right to die.

Her moving 324-word statement was read out by Justice Eleanor King in August.

Giving the reasons why Nancy should be allowed to die, Charlotte said: “My daughter is no longer my daughter, she is now merely just a shell.

“The light from her eyes is now gone and is replaced with fear and a longing to be at peace.

“Today I am appealing to you for Nancy as I truly believe she has endured enough. For me to say that breaks my heart.

“But I have to say it.”

In a landmark decision, Justice King immediately granted Charlotte’s request.

Nancy died 14 days later at London’s Great Ormond Street with her family around her after fluids were withdrawn.

The ruling sets a precedent. It is the first time a child breathing on her own, not on life support and not suffering a terminal illness has been allowed to die.

The judge’s decision was fully supported by doctors at the world famous children’s hospital – but it is bound to reignite the “right to die” debate.

And it will be further fuelled by what Nancy’s parents’ have to say today.

Charlotte, 36, had the support of Nancy’s dad, company boss David Wise, 47.

And the pair agreed to share details of Nancy’s case because they believe parents facing the same life-or-death decision should be able to make it without going to court.

They think parents should decide with medics at hospital rather then pleading in front of a judge.

It is a controversial stance. Nancy’s case comes five years after the High Court approved the death of baby Ronnie Bickell. He was born with a genetic ­condition that rendered his muscles useless.

A year later Hannah Jones made ­headlines in a High Court story that took a remarkable twist – and bolstered the case against the right to die.

At 13, she refused a life-saving heart operation. Herefordshire Primary Care Trust applied to the High Court to force the op but dropped the case after she convinced them she did not want surgery.

The next year Hannah, of Marden, decided to have the operation. The transplant was successful and she made a full recovery.

Charlotte, 36, never had such hopes of a happy ending for Nancy. She was told her baby was likely to be born severely ill two days before she gave birth in July 2002.

Charlotte was carrying Group B Streptococcus. It had gone untreated during her pregnancy.

She says: “Hearing my little girl’s ­condition could have been treatable in the womb was unbearable. If caught early, simple antibiotics can treat it.

“Instead Nancy was born blind with meningitis and septicaemia. It was utterly devastating. But I knew I would love her no matter what.”

At 10 days old, Nancy had to have a shunt fitted in her brain. She spent a month in hospital but was finally allowed to go home. Doctors warned she was likely to die before her fourth birthday.

Ronnie was on a ventilator and could not communicate but could hear, feel and see.

After months of round-the-clock care the hospital applied to turn off his life support, leaving his mum and dad on opposite sides of a bitter court battle.

In November 2009 a High Court judge ruled with his mother Kelly that Ronnie’s quality of life would not be good enough to justify the medical care. Ronnie was 13 months old when his life support machine was switched off.

There is more if you want to read it, but if you had a child that had utterly no quality of life what would you do?

OP posts:
DonutCone · 03/07/2017 09:57

Yes I would.

In the case of Charlie Gard. That poor baby has absolutely no quality of life at all. I would never want to live like that, so I wouldn't force my child to. No one can even tell if he's in pain, which is a horrendous though.

If you cannot breathe on your own, you aren't really alive in my mind anyway at that point.

TheFirstMrsDV · 03/07/2017 09:58

So one of the main reasons people gave for ending life support for CG was 'pain'. He is probably in pain. Its cruel to keep him alive in pain.

But its ok to withdraw fluids and nutrition from a child and allow them to die in pain?

We can keep children with complex needs alive now. Science has done that. We need to take responsibility for that. We need to provide proper care, rehab, therapy, support and all of the things they need to live a good quality of life.

Its a cop out to keep these children alive and abandon them because its expensive to support them and their families.

I cannot comment with any authority on this case because you cannot possibly get a proper idea of the real details from a tabloid.
I have to assume the parents were desperate to do what they feel is the best for their child.

ErnesttheBavarian · 03/07/2017 09:59

Definitely, and I hope me family would do me the same courtesy.

With 2 close family members now we have had the same heartbreaking situation. They have been seriously ill (different illnesses), and been on life support, the medics have done everything possible to keep the alive, to prevent their deaths. but there are worth things than death, much worse.

Having OP after OP, being tilted practically onto their heads to try and get blood, no recognition, no ability to speak, communicate, even blink their eyes on request. It's not humane. It's not right that everything possible is done to keep people alive. Frankly it's horrific (my experiences) I remember one convo with a doctor asking if the treatment was in the patient's best interests. I was told that yes, while there was still a chance of a good outcome. Eventually I asked, what did they mean my a good outcome. I was told, that the patient could breath independently. That's it. The patient can't recognise their family, can't eat, can't communicate, has one medical drama and OP after the other, is bed ridden with no mobility, just lying on a hospital bed attached to machines, and the GOOD outcome id being off a ventilator. WTAF.

That'S the experience we've had, like I said, 2 different family members, different hospitals, different illnesses. Fucking awful. No, I hope my family understand quite clearly that I would under no circumstances want that for myself, or anyone that I loved, or just anyone for that matter. I really think it's just wrong.

TheFirstMrsDV · 03/07/2017 10:01

WRT to Hannah' case...was she not the child who had endured years of cancer treatment?

Its not uncommon for teenagers with conditions that need horrible treatment to 'go on strike' and anyone with experience of working with sick teens would be well aware of this.

muckypup73 · 03/07/2017 10:03

This is why I do not understand why people are angry and keep calling her a murderer, surely by talking about their experience, will help them and others, but seeing so much negativity made my blood absolutely boil, why on earth would you prolong the pain and suffering?

OP posts:
KitKat1985 · 03/07/2017 10:03

Yes I believe I would if one of my DDs was experiencing severe suffering with no chance of recovery.

DonutCone · 03/07/2017 10:05

MrsDV but a child like Charlie has no quality of life, at all. He can't hear, he can't speak, he can't see, he can't breathe on his own. He can't swallow, he can't move, he is trapped there day after day like a living doll.

It's not about society taking responsibility to keep him like that as long as possible. It's about being humane.

UnbornMortificado · 03/07/2017 10:05

I withdrew my sons life support, very different circumstances but the right thing to do.

muckypup73 · 03/07/2017 10:06

UnbornMortificado, xxxxx

OP posts:
amusedbush · 03/07/2017 10:07

I can't speak to this with regards to a child as I do not have any, but my MIL recently had life sustaining care removed after a barrage of complications with a long-term illness. It was very upsetting for everyone but the whole family agrees that it was far kinder than to press on with the treatments as, had she pulled through, her quality of life would have been next to nothing. Even my DH said that you wouldn't even keep alive a pet in such circumstances, and to push for further treatment would have been purely selfish on the part of the family - not in MIL's interests at all.

rightwhine · 03/07/2017 10:09

I would do everything in my power to stop my child suffering if there was no hope of any quality of life. Even if that means me suffering more.

It reminds me of

Solomon Makes a Difficult Decision

One day two women came to King Solomon, and one of them said:

Your Majesty, this woman and I live in the same house. Not long ago my baby was born at home, and three days later her baby was born. Nobody else was there with us.

One night while we were all asleep, she rolled over on her baby, and he died.Then while I was still asleep, she got up and took my son out of my bed. She put him in her bed, then she put her dead baby next to me.
In the morning when I got up to feed my son, I saw that he was dead. But when I looked at him in the light, I knew he wasn’t my son.

“No!” the other woman shouted. “He was your son. My baby is alive!”

“The dead baby is yours,” the first woman yelled. “Mine is alive!”

They argued back and forth in front of Solomon, until finally he said, “Both of you say this live baby is yours. Someone bring me a sword.”

A sword was brought, and Solomon ordered, “Cut the baby in half! That way each of you can have part of him.”

“Please don’t kill my son,” the baby’s mother screamed. “Your Majesty, I love him very much, but give him to her. Just don’t kill him.”

The other woman shouted, “Go ahead and cut him in half. Then neither of us will have the baby.”

Solomon said, “Don’t kill the baby.” Then he pointed to the first woman, “She is his real mother. Give the baby to her.”

Everyone in Israel was amazed when they heard how Solomon had made his decision. They realized that God had given him wisdom to judge fairly.

jobergamot · 03/07/2017 10:14

what the actual fuck has Solomon got to do with it. He sounds like a crazed nutter to be honest!

The situation is heartbreaking and I can't believe that in a civilised society that 'withdrawal of fluids' is considered a humane way to treat anyone. We absolutely need a proper euthanasia strategy in this country.

CoughingForWeeks · 03/07/2017 10:15

There was a demonstration outside Downing Street yesterday; people protesting at the decision made regarding little Charlie. It must be so heartbreaking for his parents but from what I've read about his condition, it sounds doubtful that the experimental treatment would improve his quality of life, even if it helped him to live longer. It's awfully sad and clearly all parties involved believe that they are acting in Charlie's best interests but I can't imagine that GOSH would give up on any child if they thought there was any hope. I really feel for his parents though; you can see how desperately they want their son to live.

TheFirstMrsDV · 03/07/2017 10:16

donut
I am talking about the hypocrisy of citing pain for withdrawing support from one child and ignoring the pain felt by another when you withdraw nutrition and fluids.

It is one thing to make a decision not to treat an infection other than providing pain relief or to not resuscitate a child who goes into arrest or to not use rescue meds when a child has a prolonged seizure.

It is quite another to let a child starve/dehydrate.

I have 'allowed' my child to die. A previously healthy, still cogent 14 year old.
I would not allow her to die without fluids. She was having blood and platelet transfusions up until her death.

TheFirstMrsDV · 03/07/2017 10:18

Lets not bring God into this please.

DearMrDilkington · 03/07/2017 10:20

I'd like to say I'd make the same choice but I don't think anyone can decide that until they're in that situation.

mydogisthebest · 03/07/2017 10:21

ErnesttheBavarian, your post is really sad. One of my fears is that I will end up in a hospital bed unable to speak, move etc and be kept alive.

I also worry that one of my parents or my DH end up in that situation.

I too do not understand how we can euthanize a pet to stop suffering and yet allow humans to suffer

rightwhine · 03/07/2017 10:22

I'm not religious at all but what that story says to me is that you do the right thing for your child even if its painful for you.

In these cases the right thing is to end the suffering of the child who has no hope of any quality of life, even if it is immensely painful to yourself.

leghoul · 03/07/2017 10:26

If a child cannot survive without intensive medical intervention and is suffering then it's not ending their life, it's allowing natural death to remove ventilator and ionotropic support for example.
It's not right to basically prolong the dying process.

rightwhine · 03/07/2017 10:29

It is quite another to let a child starve/dehydrate.

But as long as the child is not aware of this. Presumably medication would be increased to keep him comfortable. There would be no extra suffering.

TheFirstMrsDV · 03/07/2017 10:31

If a child needs intensive medical intervention to survive what is the advantage of withdrawing fluids?
If the child will die without the intervention why would you stop nutritional support?
That doesn't make any sense to me.

Lonelymummyof1 · 03/07/2017 10:31

Seriously at some of the posters.

She did not have menegitis or sepsis for 12 years.
She had it at birth which left her with the effects for 12 years unable to do anything.
Sepsis is fatal and of not can lead to some very crap long term effects.
My DD has had is bad 4 times.

PratStick · 03/07/2017 10:31

None of us know what we would actually do until we're in the situation. I hope I would as it's what I'd hope for myself.

leghoul · 03/07/2017 10:33

& I did have to remove ventilator support for my own child and I don't feel OK about it now many years later. But would it have been right to force or try to force more treatment, more extremes, and watch them in pain having endless seizures, heart attacks, more and more surgeries, etc etc etc, decreasing function and poor pain relief? No it would have been for my benefit more than theirs. It's the sort of 'choice' I don't think any parent should ever ever have to make.
I also think a clear distinction should be made with ending life, and allowing death. We're not talking euthanasia. I strongly believe that every child has a right to life, and a child with a very serious brain injury for example still has a right to live their life to the fullest they can and be allowed to do so. I think there is a fallacy in believing anyone is better off dead. But that's only so far as medical support etc allow the prospect of some recovery to enable some quality of life, rather than inflict pain and suffering and endless lines in and whatever else, until a protracted dying happens later.

Lonelymummyof1 · 03/07/2017 10:33

Myfirst.

Last year a little girl at the hospital we were at went in to terminal stage of liver disease.
She was nutritional iv ( TPN ) like my DD.
Which is keeping them alive.
It was decided to remove the nutrition for her to go peacefully as it was pro longing her passing and she was in a lot of pain.

Swipe left for the next trending thread