Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Charlie Gard 13

999 replies

muckypup73 · 21/07/2017 08:45

This is a thread following the legal and ethical questions raised by the recent court case involving Charlie Gard.

Please could we refrain from insulting or otherwise "bashing" his parents. It isn't in the spirit of Mumsnet and will get the threads removed.

Please could we also remember that at the heart of this case is a terminally ill baby and his heartbroken parents. There are those participating in and watching this thread for whom these issues are painful. Please let's try and be mindful of them when we post. This isn't a place for name calling or trivialising the very real pain they feel. Many parents of severely disabled children are on here.

Lastly, here are some hopefully useful reference points of facts surrounding the case.

13 July GOSH position statement on latest hearing (includes update on Charlie's condition):
www.gosh.nhs.uk/file/23611/download?token=aTPZchww

7 July GOSH statement on Charlie:
www.gosh.nhs.uk/news/latest-press-releases/latest-statement-charlie-gard

June 2017 Supreme Court decision:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6rPmvGlNhA&app=desktop

May 2017 Court of Appeal Decision:
www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2017/410.html

April 2017 High Court Decision:
www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2017/972.html

GOSH FAQ page on Charlie:
www.gosh.nhs.uk/frequently-asked-questions-about-charlie-gard-court-case

OP posts:
Thread gallery
10
FallenUnicorn · 22/07/2017 00:17

Weewitch, again it sounds in that statement that GOSH are being reasonable and understanding, I said before that I've never once read or heard a bad thing coming from them towards C&C , only support.

That last sentence is upsetting, 'the effect on Charlie', meaning that it's possibly causing him pain while on the ventilator :(

Maryz · 22/07/2017 00:19

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

GabsAlot · 22/07/2017 00:20

could b that fallen wondr if the judge will mention it

mycat it is very sad that thyd rathr be at every court hearing than be with their child

an mary i agree if they hav named them on purpose to get revenge then my sympathy will hav gone -theres no xcuse for that

Maryz · 22/07/2017 00:21

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Enchantedflamingo · 22/07/2017 00:24

But gabs if they weren't at the hearing he'd have been moved to palliative care by now.

GabsAlot · 22/07/2017 00:25

yes wasnt it he said hes not a spcialist and somone with expertise would have to read the scan

JustAnotherSod · 22/07/2017 00:37

Maryz The April judgement from the High Court sets out the evidence from that time in real detail - I found these parts particularly heart rendering but I think really informative as to the evidence even back then - apologies for length.

"55. Professor A is one of the leading experts in the world with a special interest in mitochondrial diseases. She has written approaching 140 scientific articles and book chapters about mitochondrial disease and, yet, even with twenty-five years' experience and an internationally recognised expertise, she told the court that she has only been involved with six paediatric cases including Charlie and only three of these had infantile onset. Tragically, Charlie has infantile onset RRM2B deficiency which is the most severe form.

56. Professor A first because aware of Charlie's case on Tuesday, 25th October 2016. Although mitochondrial disease was already strongly suspected, investigations were carried out including blood and urine tests, a series of genetic investigations and muscle biopsy. The amount of mitochondrial DNA was determined in the muscle biopsy and reveals that Charlie had just 6% of the levels found in age matched, healthy, controlled subjects. Professor A's clear opinion is that this level will have progressively reduced since then. The definition of MDDS is having less than 35% of controlled levels indicating that 6% is very low and this enabled Professor A and her team to diagnose Charlie as having MDDS.

57. In mid-November 2016, Charlie had a genetic test known as Rapid Genome Sequencing. This was carried out as part of a research project and is not generally available on the NHS, but it shows the biallelic RRM2B mutations and these were subsequently confirmed by the NHS molecular genetics laboratory at the Oxford University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust. Accordingly, there is no doubt about Charlie's diagnosis.

58. The court has also been assisted by the written and oral evidence of Dr. B, who is employed as a Consultant Paediatric Intensivist on the Paediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit at Great Ormond Street Hospital. He has been in his post since February 2004. He described Charlie's severe symptoms as follows:

a) Progressive respiratory failure
Charlie has been ventilator dependent since presentation at the Great Ormond Street Hospital and this has progressed so severely that he now has no spontaneous respiratory effect. In other words, he is kept alive by the ventilator.

b) Hypotonia/Myopathy
Charlie has progressive weakness of his muscles including his breathing muscles leading to his progressive respiratory failure. He can no longer move his arms or legs and he is not consistently able to open his eyes enough to be able to see. Indeed, this leads to the difficulty that his brain is failing to learn to see. He cannot react in terms of reaching for fingers or other objects. He cannot grasp them.

c) Brain Activity
Dr. B confirmed that, whilst Charlie is not brain dead, he is persistently encephalopathic. In other words, there are no usual signs of normal brain activities such as responsiveness, interaction or crying. Dr. B confirmed that this is supported by repeated electrical tests in the form of EEGs.

d) Bilateral profound sensorineural hearing loss
Charlie is deaf as part of this underlying condition.

e) Persistently elevated lactate
This is, I was told, the characteristic feature of mitochondrial disease. It was indeed the strongest pointer to this diagnosis in Charlie when he first came to Great Ormond Street. Charlie suffers also from acute mitochondrial crises."

Maryz · 22/07/2017 00:46

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

TheWeeWitch · 22/07/2017 00:46

The screen shot that someone has shared up thread with the "no brain damage in April" quote is being pushed by Laura Gard right now on CA -

"Only 253 shares? Where's #charliesarmy?"

GabsAlot · 22/07/2017 00:46

thanks just

poor charlie its just horrendous

GabsAlot · 22/07/2017 00:49

mary im on twittr but not following connie or ca so i woulnt have seen it anyway

Maryz · 22/07/2017 00:50

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Maryz · 22/07/2017 00:52

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

GabsAlot · 22/07/2017 00:54

thy picking things up out of contxt dr he said he couldnt treat him back in april he woulnt even come over

jinglejanglejobs · 22/07/2017 00:55

In April Hirano said

I can understand the opinion that he is so severely affected by encephalopathy that any attempt at therapy would be futile.

Crucially, Dr I said that, having seen the 30 March EEG, the damage to Charlie’s brain was more severe than he had thought.

Hirano's agreed he's encephalopathic and has damage to his brain back in April.

JustAnotherSod · 22/07/2017 00:56

Maryz - sorry wasn't trying to suggest you hadn't read it yourself, just trying to be helpful given your question!

I think you are right - the encephalopathy has been present since November, and has been reviewed not just by GOSH but by the expert in Newcastle and the consultant from St Marys. Rather than proving GOSH are trying to kill Charlie, I think the judgement shows just how much effort has been made by them for him.

The other thing that gets me about CA is that they claim Dr H is the foremost expert in Charlie's condition but given he has never treated someone with his specific condition, that would appear to be unfair to Professor A whose experience and research is fairly exceptional given the small number of known cases worldwide.

Maryz · 22/07/2017 01:04

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

stitchglitched · 22/07/2017 01:15

Arghh I never post on news articles on fb but I've just lost my temper and ranted at an American under the Sun article who was slagging off the NHS. I think I have a couple of CA supporters among my fb friends, got a feeling I'll be getting unfriended!

I'm just so angry about how this case has been used to attack our health system and misrepresent socialised healthcare by those with an agenda.

Ellie56 · 22/07/2017 01:41

I don't get where the parents are getting "there were no signs of brain damage in April " Confused

No I don't get it either. The High Court decision in April made lots of references to brain damage:

Dr. B confirmed that, whilst Charlie is not brain dead, he is persistently encephalopathic. In other words, there are no usual signs of normal brain activities such as responsiveness, interaction or crying. Dr. B confirmed that this is supported by repeated electrical tests in the form of EEGs.

Dr. E said this:
“Indeed, the most recent EEG performed on 10th January 2017 was very similar to that recorded in December 2016 and which was indicative of a severe epileptic encephalopathy with frequent sub-clinical seizure activity.

Crucially, Dr. I said that, having seen the 30th March EEG, the damage to Charlie’s brain was more severe than he had thought. He said that he thought that Charlie was in the terminal stage of his illness. He said that he thought that the treatment, if administered, was unlikely to be of any benefit to Charlie’s brain. He described the probability as low, but not zero. He agreed that there could be no reversal of the structure of Charlie’s brain.

MsHooliesCardigan · 22/07/2017 05:04

Looking at that Sun FB link, the tide does really seem to be turning against C&C with people accusing them of being selfish and ungrateful for calling the people who have kept their child alive for 9 months murderers and lots of support for GOSH.
Mycat I have a friend who was a hospice nurse for years and she has described lots of similar deaths. She is really passionate about end of life care. I remember her talking about a 6 year old girl passing away and how staff filled the whole room with balloons and the parents let off party poppers and made a CD of their daughter's favourite music to play.
I really do worry how C&C will cope when Charlie is gone as so many of his last days will have consisted of them fighting with everyone rather than spending time with their dying son.

Sostenueto · 22/07/2017 06:40

The parents need to go and make some memories with their child this weekend in peace and dignity and move charlie to palliative care themselves so at least they will have some cherished time with him at the end. But unfortunately they have been brave fighting to keep him alive no matter what, but they lack the real courage to just let him go for his sake. So sorry for them and they have my deepest sympathy but enough really is enough. (Sad)

CatsGoPurrrr · 22/07/2017 07:06

I've been a long time lurker on these threads.

I just want to go back a few pages to where possible future litigation against GOSH was being mentioned.

The NHS Isn't insured: it self insures.

The NHS has a budget, money allocated to it by the government for treatment, salaries, everything.

Any Claim made against the NHS will come out of that money as will the NHS legal costs.

Maryz · 22/07/2017 07:25

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Rocksyluv · 22/07/2017 08:01

It appears to me that GOSH are not playing ball either, they should be totally transparent and above board on this. I don't like how KG has treated the Gards, I think it is horrendous that she announced the results of the MRI without speaking to the parents beforehand. I think it is horrendous that they have not released notes to the family, if that is the case.

This is not a 'normal' situation, so it is unfair if they are using normal long winded procedures. Anyone who has had anything to do with GOSH administrative / clerical services knows it falls well below par, they have fantastic medical staff, but the administrative side really lets the hospital down. I know that from two people who had very ill children going through treatment there.

Anyone saying that she was at the meeting, so she shouldn't need to see the notes, is not being fair to her. I don't think anyone could reasonably be espected to totally 100% recall accurately what was and wasn't said at a 4 1/2 hour meeting.

While I don't agree with what the Gards are doing, I really feel upset that people pick holes in how they are responding / reacting to the different situations they are faced with.

Writerwannabe83 · 22/07/2017 08:05

Thank you to posters who have put up quotes from the previous court case, it has really helped me understand the running history of CG's case. It sounds like a lot of Clinicians we're in agreement that there were clear issues surrounding brain dysfunction and that treatment would not really help.

The CA Mob continue to be fixated in their Witch Hunt, still harping on about the big conspiracy and cover up to kill Charlie. I used to read their posts out of curiousity to see how the opposing side really felt but now I think they have proved themselves to be non-rational and bullies. The way they talk about GOSH and it's staff is abhorrent and I really hope there is some recourse. I cannot see how they are allowed to say such spiteful things and try and turn the country, and even the world, against one of the best hospitals. I often wonder how C&C really feel about the CA and the stuff they write, I wonder if they're in agreement with it or whether part of them is ashamed to be linked to such nastiness.

The more I read of the CA's posting the more sorry I feel for C&C to have such pressure forced upon them to "do the right thing". I'm sure the CA genuinely think they are helping but I really don't see how such vitriol can help. They are currently hunting down any kind of source they can to show what "liars" everyone is at GOSH and then sharing and Thunderclapping it again as part of their "Let's make everyone hate GOSH" campaign. As previous posters have said I think society is now feeling more sympathy towards GOSH now than the parents and I think the ramblings and cruel words from the CA have contributed to that and they just can't see it. Their absolute refusal to accept his truly ill poor little Charlie is just astounds me. I will be interested to see how many of their army actually show up at the Court on Monday and Tuesday.

I still don't know which way the Judge is going to rule, one day I'm convinced he will stick to his original decision to withdraw life support and then the next day I think he's going to allow the treatment to go ahead. The CA have said they hope his wife is pleading with him to allow the treatment because "as a mother she will understand" - I guess that means that fathers don't know what it's like to love their children? It's just insane.

Like I said, I'm conflicted about what judgement will be made next week but I have faith that the right one will be made for Charlie. Nobody wants to see a baby die and if treatment really could help them obviously everyone would want him to have it, but if the meeting that was held this Monday reinforces what the doctors originally thought then their opinions have to be respected and accepted.

About 6 months ago I cared for a baby at work who was born with a neurological condition that would ultimately be incompatible with life. He first came to us when she was about a month old and he and her family were just amazing. The parents knew that ultimately, despite our treatment, their little boy would die and they made every moment count. The family were religious (Christians) and they had their faith but they were also accepting of the truth. The baby flitted between the ward and our HDU for months until eventually at 10 months old he deteriorated so badly that he had to be transferred to a specialist children's hospital where he was ventilated after a few days there. The doctors spoke honestly with parents that there was a treatment option which may help their son but it would be quite traumatic to his system, they couldn't guarantee it would work and it wouldn't ultimately save him but would just prolong his life for a few months. Her parents had watched their son suffer for so long, he'd spent his life in hospital hooked up to machinery and they saw how frail he was and they made the decision to have the ventilator switched off. After they made this decision they had two days before it would actually be done and during that time they had the family and their Priest be at his bedside where they had lovely ceremonies for him and said their goodbyes. I went to the little boy's funeral and it was very, very hard and upsetting but ultimately the parents had made the decision that was right for their son. When I read posts on the CA page that imply parents only love their children if they are prepared to fight for them (in terms of withdrawing life support) it really angers me becaus they have no idea about the enormity of making such a heartbreaking decision. One poster has wrote,"Some parents just accept what the doctors say and have their child's life support turned off but the rest are willing to fight for their children's lives." How can they not see how hurtful such comments are. I really despair.

Anyway, I have a feeling I've really rambled. I just wanted to get my current thoughts out.

GOSH and Judge Francis have my full support and I think GOSH have behaved admirably during all of this because the way they've been treated, victimised and discredited is disgusting.

Just to end, I hope C&C have someone supporting them through this because they must feel very alone and frightened. The whole case is just incredibly sad.

Swipe left for the next trending thread