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

I meant exactly that Lello, a black and white approach, given that doctors are always required to act in a patient's best interests and that there would always be a team in agreement, not a single doctor.

I really think there is absolutely no point in going on the FB page. It is representative of only a minute minority that seems to exist in their own little bubble, and whose opinions are never going to be changed by things like facts or logic. So looking at their ravings is going to serve no purpose other than raising your blood pressure.

Tea - I think the same woman has been on Sky News, at the demonstration yesterday. She was around my age, so not young, and she said she had phoned GOSH - more than once to let them know - why they are wrong.
My thoughts are with CC & C today

morning

peopl mentioning this other child in the uk being treated-does anyon have any info or is it being kept for court

an why now why not last week or the last court hearing

good article medium.com/@anu.wartiovaara/baby-charlie-gard-a-scientists-view-to-mitochondrial-dna-depletion-syndrome-1f94e4010205

I think that some of us have gone to CA to try and get an insight in to how the family are thinking, statements are released on there periodically from them.

Sometimes it's hard to understand how people get to the point they are at and how the situation exploded.

I hope that other posters are able to discuss all the aspects of the case (while remaining within guidelines) and don't get streamed in to the one echo chamber of opinion which is 'mumsnet approved'.

We all have differing opinions and I think we should report rather than attack other posters on here (not that you have Ceto).

As everyone else on here is, thinking of Charlie today.

I agree with you Ceto.

Absolutely agree Ceto

Although I still find myself going onto the CA page although I know it is a bad idea for me

Accrual that's a brilliant article.

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.

She was quoting somebody else, they aren't her own thoughts.

I have always fascinated in human behaviours and psychology hence why I look at the CA Page. Their mentality and approaches would make for a very interesting Social Experiment type report as many posters have previously said.

Their post only angered me this morning because I thought, that just once, someone was going to post something sympathetic towards everyone involved in the case and that maybe the CA did have some rational members and when I realised that wasn't the case I just felt annoyed.

Like I've previously said, I'm sure the majority of their support comes from a good, genuine place, but today I just think they should back away a little. Maybe that's why comments have disabled, to stop shouting, vitriol, accusations and nastiness etc because it really isn't appropriate today.

The other case with a terminally ill baby has been held in camera one imagines. They key difference is no social media.

Sostenuento..Lark ascending..one of the most beautiful pieces of music ever written.
Went on a walk last evening,the astonishingly beautiful sunset and knee high mist that hazed the land it looked otherworldly.
Beautiful sights in the natural world, lovely music soothe the soul.

There was a video of a father in the Daily Mail a day or so ago, [it may be mentioned upthread]
Whose baby son James was born with the same severe genetic condition as Charlie.
The un-named father was so 'serene' compared to C&C, he realised nothing realistically could be done to improve his son's condition.
He spoke with great dignity ..well worth watching for a very different parental viewpoint.
Respects to all parents and families concerned.

Writerwannabe83 tbh if you hadn't looked at the page at all, it would hard to have a balanced discussion.

I hope they turn the GOSH comments off too today as while I have been very against the abuse towards GOSH, some of the comments supporting them are too harsh and should not be seen by the parents today.

All sides (3) in this case have equal access in court so I don't see how it can be one sided. It has not been and each side can question the other side. The judge hears all sides. So it will not be one sided and will be fair and not speculative.

I have not looked at any FB pages!

Just catching up. Thoughts with Charlie and all the family. I watched their photo montage last night - I was in absolute bits. My sympathy for C&C had almost gone but that really reminded me that these are two young parents just like me who have no idea how to even begin to cope with their devastation.

Thank you to those who will copy the tweets. I hope the outcome is the one that Charlie needs but I can't help but feel incredibly sad today.

for all.

Maryz, Yes, the next few days will be tough on the lawyers too.
MrJustice Dingemans actually wept while winding up a high profile extremely distressing murder case at Bristol Crown Court last year.

Judges quite rightly cannot let emotion sway their Judgments, but they are human, after all.
The unwarranted attacks on Katie Gollop QC are very unfair.
KG is only doing her job, she is just representing her client,GOSH,
Yet if the Gard/Yates family employed her, she would represent them.
CA don't seem to realise how lawyers work?

I discovered yesterday evening that I had joined CA. It must have happened days ago, when I failed to answer their joining questions, just clicked away in fact, but I noticed that there was a tick and 'Joined' in a blue box at the top. I unjoined.

Thinking of Charlie today. I shall be at work so would be very grateful if tweets were posted. Thank you all for keeping us informed.

Gobbolino: The Family Division of the High Court publishes its judgements. Whilst names are withheld, the judgements are published. They should be. Although proceedings are not reported upon, the judgements are freely available to all. The clear difficulty here is the publicity the parents wanted in order to raise money which changes everything.

Gard/Yates had one of KG's colleagues representing them in the first case, pro bono.

If blackout's are introduced then it becomes harder to justify not having anonymity for those accused of crimes.