Charlie Gard case

[LovelyBath77]

AIBU to feel the drama over this poor little boy is not helpful? I read the Pope and Donald Trump were suggesting they help- when several courts have agreed it is in his best interests to let the little boy die with dignity. I feel sorry for him as he may be in pain and it is unfair to add further to false hope for the parents as well. I also feel that many, many people has awful situations where babies die, sadly, for example stillbirths and other cases which are just un-heard and un-noticed and people have to deal with it, so why is there such a huge focus here.

I know this has been said on other threads (I think the main one is now full?), but, if you can, please express your support for GOSH by making a small donation or sending them a private FB message; anything to counterbalance the vitriol.

They're a team of world-class medical professionals who spend their lives trying to help very unwell children. To have an online mob calling them murderers is beyond awful.

I feel like that's the most obvious fucking point ever, but what's the point in being subtle when the GOSH FB page is full of such vile and stupid crap like 'he could live a normal life and you are stopping this from happening', 'prisoners on death row have more rights' and 'u really think people gunna support u if u keep murdering babies'.

A handful of irrational hateful posts would be bad enough, but the sheer volume of this shite is unbearable, and it's reached the level where international political figures are weighing in.

Maybe GOSH wanted them to be able to take him home but end of the day what best for Charlie is what matters more then the parents wishes.

This is why it seems the whole America situation didn't happen as it wouldn't have benefited Charlie.

whitecat The Barmy army have said they will gather round his bedside in hospital and stop the machine from being switched off. How could GOSH let this boy home after all those hysterical threats and the obvious flight risk of the parents? There would be a crowd of people at their door and ready to try to smuggle him out of the country within minutes of him getting home.

Charlie is on life support. He can't live without the machine, it's not so simple as putting him in his car seat and taking him home.

And Aysha King isn't comparable to this at all.

That poor little baby boy. He is the centre of a huge circus and his best interests seem to have been forgotten by most people.

This.

He should be allowed to die with dignity but he can't because of the media circus that now surrounds him. No one is actually really thinking about him at all.

'A handful of irrational hateful posts would be bad enough, but the sheer volume of this shite is unbearable, and it's reached the level where international political figures are weighing in.'

It is very wrong I agree. sadly it is the mob mentality that we see every day in the press. I support the medical tem 100% but this terrible situation should have been handled better to prevent the media circus if nothing else, never mind prolonging the parents and the patients suffering.

I don't think taking parents to court to withdraw life support of their dc should ever happen. Patients on ventilators sadly usually die of other associated illnesses, infections etc. not escalating treatment or not introducing any further support eg drugs to support the cardiovascular system should someone deteriorate etc should have been the aim sorry if that upsets anyone reading.

Stop comparing Charlie to Aysha King the two are not the same!

Decisions to withdraw care on children get made every day on every intensive care in the world! It's not unique to GOSH!

All of you saying how unfair it is on GOSH and the doctors - how do you justify that they refused parents wish to take their dying baby home????

Seeing as they weren't required to publicly state their reasons to the Great Online Mob And Anyone Else Interested, I don't know, but here are three possibilities:

a) that they've weighed the benefit to Charlie of this complex relocation, against Charlie's potential suffering in the process, and decided he should remain in the hospital.
b) that weeks of intensifying online abuse, including the threats to demonstrate outside a children's hospital and repeated defamation against GOSH and its staff, make it unreasonable that any of Charlie's medical team should be expected to work in an environment where they may reasonably fear abuse, harassment or harm.
c) that it is all a conspiracy and GOSH staff are evil.

Parents obviously know he is on life support and wanted to pay for the transfer home OR to a hospice!!!!!

How the hell doctors(or randon people on internet) can say that it's in Charlies "best interest" to die at hospital and not at home????

The whole case is just plain wrong.The amount of power NHS has is frightening. I pray my son never needs to be admitted to a NHS hospital as it seems I will loose all parental rights when it happens. In Europe is is not uncommon AT ALL to seek second opinion and change treatment.*

The NHS does not have untold power. They have had months of legal proceedings to endure to get to this point.
Of course you don't lose all parental right when a child is admitted. Think how many millions of children are treated on the NHS every year. Compare that with how rare such cases as this one are. That comment is inflammatory, unhelpful and just plain wrong
Second options have been sort and third. They all say the same. It's not uncommon here either and it is a patients right to a second opinion.
The only people who can judge whether it is possible for Charlie to go home are the medical professionals involved in his care. You know, the ones with full access to his medical records, and the years of training to properly interpret and access these records.
Not his understandably distraught parents, who have no medical knowledge what so ever.

The GOSH motto is "The child first and always". It is so sad that in some circumstances, achieving this causes heartbreak for so many. I wish wisdom and strength to all involved in Charlie's case (and to all families and medical staff facing similar situations)

ARumWithAView: They should ABSOLUTELY be required to justify such a decision - not to the online mob but to the PARENTS. The fact that they aren't is wrong and frightening.

No wonder this case is used to scare Americans re social health care.

super yes I thought that also.

I doubt they would be able to get him on a plane to USA though

The parents may be willing to pay for a private team to take Charlie home but there is a very real probability that he would die in transit. How is that fair to Charlie?

Also, to be blunt, it's not Charlie's "home". He has been in hospital for goodness knows how long, it is his familiar environment.

How do you know they haven't justified it to the parents?
And taking him home is for the parents. Not for Charlie. For him, sadly, he is "home". He's lived there the vast majority of his life

The Barmy army have said they will gather round his bedside in hospital and stop the machine from being switched off

Oh yeah cos that'll totally work. They're a scary bunch.

How the hell doctors(or randon people on internet) can say that it's in Charlies "best interest" to die at hospital and not at home????

Because of the very real chance that Charlie wouldn't make it home.

Can you imagine what would happen if they were allowed to take him home? Really? They would have people camped outside his house, it would be crazy. And once again a media circus that this boy does not need!

If you read one of the most recent judgements from the ECHR: www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/charlie-gard-190617.pdf (And I am going to copy and paste because many don't have time to go read the whole thing)

Para 10

(b) it was not certain whether Charlie is suffering pain but it is likely that he is suffering it and at more than a low level
(c) the clinician in the US who was offering the treatment favoured by the parents conceded that the chances of its securing meaningful brain recovery were vanishingly small (para 105); and

(d) the proposed treatment would not only be futile but might well cause pain, suffering and distress to Charlie.

Para 13: the effect of the judge’s findings was that the harm which he was suffering was “significant”

So he may look peaceful heavily sedated on a vent, but this is likely to be because he is unable to demonstrate a response to pain. The agreement is that he is actively suffering harm.

Para 17 and 18:

We three members of this court find ourselves in a situation which, so far as we can recall, we have never previously experienced. By granting a stay, even of short duration, we would in some sense be complicit in directing a course of action which is contrary to Charlie’s best interests. But, from a legal point of view... are the best interests of Charlie necessarily always paramount? There is, says Mr. Gordon QC on behalf of the parents, another requirement in play, namely that such (human) rights as they have under articles 2 and 8

The conflict between Charlie's best interests and his parents' best interests, and which should be put first were a clear focus of the ECHR's consideration.

Para 15: Every day since 11 April 2017 the stays have obliged the hospital to take a course which, as is now clear beyond doubt or challenge, is not in the best interests of Charlie.

Paragraph 21 also adds something of another perspective, although I won't copy it here. It seems clear that the ECHR had the utmost sympathy and compassion for parents in a terrible situation. However they also mention medics in a situation of having to act unethically and against a child's best interests while courts work out if a child has rights separate to their parents' rights.

In cases where a child is found to be suffering pain and harm, yes they absolutely do.

GOSH are damned if they do and damned if they don't. If they comment publicly they are breaking patient confidentiality, if they don't comment they are "evil".

Whilst I don't want to accuse bereaved parents of lying, we only have their word about what has been said to them.

I wonder why GOSH does not just close their website to these comments.

It is very sad. I think the doctors know best and know whats best for him, however I know if it were one of my children, I would be the same as his parents and want him to have every chance possible and prolong his life for as long as I could. It is hearrbreaking for them.

Whitecat
How do you know they haven't justified it and the parents are choosing to dismiss it?
We don't know what is going on in that hospital. Neither should we.
I am working on logic
A group of highly trained doctors, who have taken an oath to do no harm
Two understandable heartbroken and increasing desperate parents who want to hold on to their child at all costs.
Who is the most likely to be seeing this clearly?

The whole case is just plain wrong.The amount of power NHS has is frightening. I pray my son never needs to be admitted to a NHS hospital as it seems I will loose all parental rights when it happens. In Europe is is not uncommon AT ALL to seek second opinion and change treatment

Oh don't be so bloody dramatic. This case will have gone through second and third opinions. You can't just withdraw treatment. Even brain stem tests have to be carried out by two doctors.