Active discussions

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

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Charlie Gard 9

999 replies

muckypup73 · 14/07/2017 20:53

Hi guys new thread.

Let's try to keep this one as sensible and measured as the past 7 threads have been.

Please note the MNHQ comment on thread number 7.

"Hi everyone,

..... We had to remove several parent-blaming posts, so we'd like to ask folk not to do this. We think we can all agree that this is a truly awful time for all involved and we just wouldn't wish it on anyone. If there's anything we could do with more of, it's support. We'll continue to remove reported posts that break TGs (if we've missed something, do feel free to let us know).

If we have to make too many deletions, we will need to look at removing the thread; which is the last thing we wish to do.

Thanks all"

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
lougle · 14/07/2017 22:41

Half of the problem is that the public should never know the details of these situations, and normally would never know them, but because of the way this has been played out in the media, we know fragments of information. The fragments of information are often more confusing than no information or the whole information. Rightly, we can't be told the whole information, but most of CA and other interested parties won't be satisfied by no information, so they'll try to plug the partial information and 'fill the gaps' with their own best guess at the truth. But their best guess is often very misguided and confused. Sadly, with lots of like-minded supporters, their best guesses gain credibility and don't get challenged, especially when moderators can block anyone who disagrees.

TinselTwins · 14/07/2017 22:41

Dear god they can't even grasp the basics of this cause they claim to care so deeply about

Someone has linked an article that says that the Judge has ruled that the US doctor should be allowed to travel to the UK!
None of the comments about this point out the error. The US doctor was never banned from travelling from the UK, the judge just asked him if he would travel to the UK.

I admit it did make make me laugh that they posted photos of themselves trying to figure out which way round to do a C shape with their thumbs and forefingers - Oh dear! half of them keep doing it back to front!

flugella · 14/07/2017 22:42

It wouldn't surprise me if the final ruling on this will become precedent for any future attempts by parents in a similar situation. HHJF is playing a blinder here, covering all areas in order to give a comprehensive judgement that could be quoted in future.
(Dual qualified dentist and lawyer here)

goodbyestranger · 14/07/2017 22:43

Presumably, since the US guy's single caveat was about head growth (if it hadn't grown that would be cause for concern), then the parents' refusal of any scans will be the end of the case. Aren't they completely in a corner on that or am I wrong on any matter of detail?

goodbyestranger · 14/07/2017 22:44

flugella yes I think it's going to be a long and very comprehensive judgment when it comes, a lot is at stake.

Rachel0Greep · 14/07/2017 22:45

From CA page
Poster 1 I think it's very dangerous to have an mri or eeg now considering morphine is being used on the little lad. And if they take him off of morphine his brain function might change again. It's like treading on eggshells with GOSH because they seem to be hunting for everything that'll support their decision to essentially murder Charlie.
Any results now they'll try to interpret to their benefit. I just PRAY they do not try and weasel their way into the specialist's mind...as he's been very supportive and promising so far!

Poster 2 I very much doubt morphine would interfere with the outcome of either, just curious as to why you say that...

Poster 1 I just read somewhere that morphine effects the brain stem, so I didn't know if that was why GOSH had resorted to it last minute.

'I just read it'...oh okay then...
The level of expertise from people such as Poster 1, on that Page is ...amazing.
This whole Charlie's Army thing has made an already tremendously difficult situation worse, in my opinion. Not one of them seems to have stepped back to wonder why an internationally renowned hospital would be conspiring in the way they seem to believe.

reallyanotherone · 14/07/2017 22:47

The us people really don't get it do they. Charlie would be dead by now as no insurance company would have funded 10m life support for a terminally ill baby. Even with the 1.3m raised they'd have gone through that in weeks.

Some also really seem to struggle with the difference between the uk and europe. It's all the same thing to them. I think they see the uk as a european state, rather than a separate country.

Sostenueto · 14/07/2017 22:47

What I've been saying all day goodbyestranger. Read my post on previous thread. Judge playing a real poker face game IMO.

MyPuppyIsADick · 14/07/2017 22:50

There's no chance the American doctor will still agree to treat Charlie after seeing him in his current state, surely?

Sostenueto · 14/07/2017 22:50

Yes the judge is going to be real thorough. Every base covered.

TinselTwins · 14/07/2017 22:51

I just PRAY they do not try and weasel their way into the specialist's mind...as he's been very supportive and promising so far!

Cool. So. You're hoping that professional minds don't put their heads together and agree on a multi-professional team plan for the lad Hmm

fucking hell.

And lots of "he's had no treatment" "they haven't treated him at all" - bloody idiots! if they hadn't treated him he would have died long ago

Sostenueto · 14/07/2017 22:52

Mind you, he was losing it a bit with the parents barrister and the parents about the independent ethics person as they were trying to dictate who that was going to be.

Gobbolinothewitchscat · 14/07/2017 22:52

One of the big issues with US commentators is that the US is the only country in the world not signatory to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. So, in the US, this kind of litigation would not arise as the parental rights would be the key driver. Charlie would not exist as his own person but merely as an extension of his parents and their wishes would be paramount (as long as they or their insurers could pay for any treatment).

Sostenueto · 14/07/2017 22:53

Not if he has any sense mypuppyisadick.

Sostenueto · 14/07/2017 22:55

Unfortunately America us not as ethical as us.

Sostenueto · 14/07/2017 22:57

As stated child's needs in America not considered as it is over here. The parents have rights over child. That's what I meant about ethical.

Sostenueto · 14/07/2017 23:00

OhmrsQ must have been scared off. Hope she didn't think we are part of CA.Sad

Ellie56 · 14/07/2017 23:01

Reading GOSH's latest statement, the parents just don't get that Charlie has rights of his own which are entirely separate from them do they?

They need to understand that in the UK parents don't havethe same rights that parents have in America.

goodbyestranger · 14/07/2017 23:01

Sure Sostenueto but I'm just not clear in the tweets where the parents have refused a scan for definite, hence asking if I'm missing detail or getting it wrong. But the US guy clearly won't treat if he can't confirm the facts about the one issue he expressed reservations about. It seems cut and dried which is why I assume I have something wrong.

Gobbolinothewitchscat · 14/07/2017 23:04

Reading GOSH's latest statement, the parents just don't get that Charlie has rights of his own which are entirely separate from them do they?

I don't think that's necessarily true. I think they genuinely believe that this treatment will help him. That may seem somewhat deluded but I can see why they would want to explore every possible angle.

What I think they can't accept is that GOSH should have any say in whether treatment is withdrawn

GinSoakedTwitchyPony · 14/07/2017 23:05

They need to understand that in the UK parents don't havethe same rights that parents have in America.

Agree, and unfortunately, now that more American commentators are getting involved I think that element of understanding is going to become more unlikely.

I've also just seen a CA comment that I'm guessing has been made by a US citizen, pontificating about the NHS:

" It keeps being mentioned that the courts are being too lenient on GOSH for their alleged misconduct. What I think a lot of people fail to realize is that the courts and GOSH are on the same team. The general structure of a socialized healthcare system is that it's run just like any other business. Otherwise, it fails. Comparing it to a traditional business, your government is the business owner, the hospitals/doctors are the employees, and the citizens are the customers. In a traditional setting, the business knows it must keep its customers happy to maintain revenue, and its employees are free to leave at will. The big difference with socialized healthcare is that the customers are forced to continue providing revenue, even when they're unhappy, and the employees need to be very careful not to irritate their employer. Now we see the result. For every one piece of evidence provided by GOSH, Charlie's team must provide over and above that to sway the court. It's unfair from the get go, but the blame doesn't fall on GOSH entirely. No matter what, Charlie has opened up this conversation worldwide. As someone who looks for any reason to tell my government they've overstepped their boundaries, his parents have blown my mind with their unwavering commitment to him. What they are going through by taking on this system is much tougher than anyone seems to realize. Especially those blaming GOSH and not recognizing it's all rigged in favor of supporting the business' interests first."

Deux · 14/07/2017 23:06

I'm sure someone on here must know. Will there be a transcript or summary or suchlike of today's hearing? And if so, when is it likely to be available?

I've stumbled into the Daily Fail and they're saying that CY didn't want a social worker sitting in on the meeting.

sodablackcurrant · 14/07/2017 23:06

This is just awful.

No decision will be the right decision for the deluded mob.

But I really do hope that the parents realise that the decision has to be for their lovely child, not them.

Gobbolinothewitchscat · 14/07/2017 23:07

Im fairly sure there will be a livenote (or similar) transcript. I don't think it will be made public.

alcibiades · 14/07/2017 23:09

I do think that Connie and Chris are in very deep denial. This is what was quoted in the Court of Appeal decision from Judge Francis’ earlier judgement:

The disease is caused by biallelic mutations – that is two mutations, one inherited from each parent – in a gene called RRM2B. This gene is needed for replication and maintenance of the mitochondrial DNA and repair of the nuclear DNA.

www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2017/410.html

The sad fact is that they are both the unwitting cause of Charlie’s condition. I really can’t imagine what it must have been like for them to have been given that information. That might possibly be the beginnings of the breakdown between C&C and GOSH because, goodness only knows, no-one would want to be told that. If Charlie were to die from this condition, then that would be “proof” that they had passed on something to their son that made him incompatible with life. If they can keep Charlie alive, then that would be “proof” that his genetic inheritance isn’t so bad after all.

Swipe left for the next trending thread