Charlie Gard 14

[GabsAlot]

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

Just wanted to join in the thoughts and prayer for C&C today, and, of course, Charlie. I hope that whatever today brings, the family are able to accept and are at peace knowing that they have done all they could.

I agree that now is not the time for recriminations or criticism.

Not going to speculate as to why the court timings have changed, but if the scans are truly "sad reading", C&C will be utterly devastated. I wish them strength to deal with whatever is said in court today. I also sincerely hope that the spineless shits making threats against GOSH staff & those criticising C&C's parenting, stop their vitriol.

All that is important is making the right decision for a little boy who is terminally ill & quite possibly suffering.

Accruall: That is a brilliant article and sums up some of the dilemmas of this case and the calls for anonymity perfectly. I strongly suggest everyone reads it. It also sums up the dilemma faced when people are publicly raising money and how is it then not possible to publish names in the case. Never mind the interference and tweets from abroad. There would not appear to be an answer! Even the transparency project, who support transparency in the justice system, have deep concerns over this. Interesting that another case has been heard where there has been no coverage. It can be done if all parties agree to it.

Very interesting article Accrual , sensitively written. Thank you, I hadn't seen this before. This part in particular seemed a very well expressed summary of a pov that has been discussed on these threads:

evidence of mistrust and denigration of the law itself, hand-in-hand with some of the denigration of medical expertise at GOSH, because it is seen to fail to satisfy what an emotional impulse demands. There is a sort of immature belief in fairy-tales and miracles in preference to a coherent, universal system of law and impartial judgment

I too am thinking of the Gard family today and hope the outcome is the best one for Charlie

@TeaStory I agree there's a huge amount of misinformation out there, like that radio clip.

I have friends who still don't understand it. And it's not that they differ in opinion, it's that they really haven't heard the facts as laid out in court because they rely on news outlets who can't be bothered to check the facts. Or choose not to report them.

I wish I could screen shot what I've just read on CA because it's made me so angry!!!!

The post started off asking people to not only bear in mind how C&C are but also to spare a thought for Judge Francis....

I thought it was going to be a kind post, encourage the CA to understand what a difficult position the Judge is etc etc but no, it just turns into another one of their rants.

It really irritated me!

Why can't the just lay off with their theories for a few days and have some respect for the enormity of the case.

They seem to be turning off comments on most of the FB page now?

I think this is the post you mean writer
While we are all praying for Charlie, Connie and Chris today, could we also spare a few moments to include Justice Francis in our prayers. He is being given a very rare opportunity afforded to judges these days, the chance to rectify his own mistake. May he be given the wisdom to see through the misinformation provided by the hospital and allow him to recognise the error that he made in April. May he also be given the courage to admit that his original decision was an error that needs to be rectified, in light of the new evidence and the willingness and optimism of the American doctors, to treat our little Charlie. God bless you all

That's the one Lapin

I didn't Copy and Paste as I thought one of the MNHQ Rules was that we couldn't screen shot or quote from the CA page?

I wish they would clarify for us what we can and can't do? Is there any way we can contact them to comment on this thread to let us know? I think we should all know their rules before the Court Case starts so we don't end up having the thread deleted because we are doing things HQ don't want us to...

I've done that two or more pages ago. Will try again this morning.

Writerwannabe83 I don't know either and am reluctant to contribute for that reason at the moment.

I did email them last night about an issue, so they might reply and cover what is allowed and what isn't.

Brilliant article, Accrual, thank you.

Thanks for the link Accrual. Really useful.
I do think that there will definitely be a lot of discussion around privacy/reporting restrictions for future cases, from both the NHS and the judicial system.

In my humble opinion, if it is said in open court, then it is permissible here. What we should avoid is speculation, opinions with no basis in fact whatsoever, and screen shots of vile rubbish that are not truthful and are hurtful to everyone involved. Personally I care very little about the CA fb page and posts because it has no relevance to the court proceedings and feeds the frenzy. I think tweets from the court are relevant and have no spin. If we read the article posted from The Transparency Project, we can see what damage ill informed social media does. We should not promote it here. Just my opinion.

We often get nasty emails in my work because of the research we do. The only reason I mention this I am on “in-box” duty and for some strange reason we received this somewhat lovely prayer which I thought was maybe nice to share today.

Lord I come to You today to present Charlie to You. This very deadly sickness that is upon him is very sad to all who know and love him. I know that in times like this his Mother and Father are in despair. Please keep them strong in You so that they can be a comfort to this dear little child. Please keep Charlies from being scared of what is happening all around him. I ask Your mercy so that pain would be minimal or nonexistence. I ask that You may take him into your safekeeping and that his Mother and Father know you have him safe with You. Bestow Your grace and peace to them and all who love them. I pray this in Jesus name, Amen

I do apologise if I have offended anyone's religious beliefs as that is not my intention.

I also saw that post on CA. I can't work out what exactly makes me cross about it. But it's very unlikely the judge will see it so it won't make any actual difference

Maryz in terms of what the way forward might be, it would be open to the judge today - I think - to say that in a case where there is no agreement, the doctors have the authority to have the final say. You're right - the NHS can't afford to fund these cases if they become a regular thing.

A few questions for everyone to ponder - how do parents raise money without publicity? How do you then have privacy and reporting restrictions when the name is already in the public domain? How do you stop international tweets from Trump etc? In short, how can campaigns and privacy go together? Even with the GOSH staff not being named in court, people who wish to abuse them know who they are. It's impossible to control when parents go public. As the article makes clear, not everyone chooses this route.

I don't believe the judge needs any help of that sort Lapin and I don't think we'll be seeing him rectifying any mistake.

Bubblesbuddy there are already regulations in place in family court to stop proceedings being reported. It's called 'in camera' and my understanding, from my own experience, is that no parties involved are allowed to discuss or report issues outside. The courtroom itself is cleared of any reporters, other solicitors not involved with the case or any members of the public. I wonder if, going forward, similar proceedings will automatically be held 'in camera'.

Personally I care very little about the CA fb page and posts because it has no relevance to the court proceedings and feeds the frenzy. I think tweets from the court are relevant and have no spin. If we read the article posted from The Transparency Project, we can see what damage ill informed social media does. We should not promote it here. Just my opinion.

Absolutely agree. The CA stuff is just background noise to the discussion

Yes Bubbles restrictions on publicity precludes fund raising. Perhaps that would be no bad thing.

Goodbyestranger surely that is already enshrined in law? The medics will always act in the patients 'best interests' and as long as they can provide evidence, then that will apply? I don't imagine there would be a black and white approach that states the Drs are 'always' right?

I saw that CA have turned off comments for most of its posts, I wonder why?