Charlie Gard (16) Future implications arising from case

[Puzzledandpissedoff]

If anyone wants to post, perhaps we could consider what implications today's case might have for others in future ... ?

IDK, Maryz. I don't think the family can think that far ahead to form that type of agenda.

I think at this point all they know is that in their minds they want to control Charlie's, I can't even think of the word. Death? Fate? Future? Whatever you want to call it, I think they feel that their 'power' was taken away from them up to this point, all decisions were out of their control, not because they weren't the right decisions, but because they weren't their decisions. I think they are bound and determined that they will have this their way, no matter what the cost or what the effect on Charlie.

It's just all too, too sad.

Today 15:40 friendlysnakehere

Can we please ignore Nina now? To come on to a thread such as this purely to cause trouble is low.

I deeply resent the above. I have reported you.

Doesn't matter what causes a child's demise..it is how the end of life care is handled that is important.
Dignity for the child.

I agree AcrossthePond

CY has just shouted to GOSH barrister Katie Gollop "let us get what we want for once" on way out

And there we have it!

Poor poor Charlie.

I have only been lurking, but wow.

I am also disgusted that people can slander whoever they want and not face the repercussions. Just because someone is grieving DOES NOT give them the right to act petulant and be constantly demanding.

Somebody needs to help Connie. She needs support desperately. Why is she not getting that from anybody?!

oakleaffy, he is not getting the dignity though, neither are the parents and its all through their own making, so sad.

IdentifiesAsYoda they have had some control as in keeping him on a ventilator far longer than the medics wanted to.

They have controlled a media campaign to defame a world class hospital and part of being a good parent is doing the best for your child.

It's about what is best for Charlie, not who gets the last word.

Acrossthepond you put that beautiful, their decisions not the right decisions - absolutely.

Officeshoes - yes that is starting to me my view as well. In the future the parents may well look back at this and think they might of fought as hard as they could, but they lost important time with their child as well.

I have been watching this story from the start....In my honest opinion this child's suffering (whether in pain or not) has been a media circus. Yes, without unequivable doubt, the parents have done the utmost they can - however, do we believe the media in believing this US doctor said he could help for financial gain? Probably in my opinion - whether an eminent doctor in this area or not. The parents obviously have seen securing evidence to now decide to allow GOSH to switch off.

I hope that this brave little soldier goes onto rest in peace.

Having lost a lot of sympathy for Charlie's parents I found myself yesterday crying at their words and feeling totally sympathetic (apart from their digs at GOSH). Today I am not feeling very sympathetic but am feeling incredibly angry.

That poor baby needs to be allowed to be at peace. I truly hope he is not suffering as if he is his parents are prolonging it.

Charlie has lived, I believe, 10 months of his short life at GOSH. That is more his home than anywhere else. He also has no idea what "home" is or where it is. This is purely for the parents' benefit and is totally unfair and, I think, cruel for Charlie.

They say they want to be left alone to spend precious time with their baby and they want privacy and yet the very next day there they are at the High Court demanding this and demanding that. For God's sake spend some actual time with your child.

I don't think they should be allowed to take Charlie home because I could just see them refusing to let anyone turn life support off and just keeping him on it indefinitely.

I get they are grieving parents but they are also totally selfish ones

What a sad update. How can any clinician think this is in the best interest of the baby? Of course they are going to stand with their patient and give then the best possible outcome for exiting this life. It's an impossible situation. The parents should accept and move on. And really start planning their lives from now on.

"let us get what we want for once"

That's the heartbreaking thing. No one can give them what they want- no foreign specialists, no pastors, no one. The harsh truth is their son is dying and they need to accept that and put him before them in his final days.

Can Francis J rule on his own that the hearing will be a closed one at this point?

friendlysnake

Oh I agree

It's irrational, it's fastastical. It should not determine what happens to their son

They have said in the 'comfort' of his own home, he is in the best comfort possible, the idea of moving him to some makeshift camp to suit them is just deplorable no matter how frantic with grief they are.

Some people unfortunately cannot be helped with counselling, mediation etc.
Until they accept their need for this help or support it is impossible for anyone to do anything.
I say this from personal experience.

Yes @NerrSnerr. Quite.

"It's about what is best for Charlie, not who gets the last word."

"he is not getting the dignity though, neither are the parents and its all through their own making, so sad."

"Just because someone is grieving DOES NOT give them the right to act petulant and be constantly demanding."

"I think they feel that their 'power' was taken away from them up to this point, all decisions were out of their control, not because they weren't the right decisions, but because they weren't their decisions. I think they are bound and determined that they will have this their way, no matter what the cost or what the effect on Charlie."

So much sense being spoken (or typed!) on this thread.
Why can't the Yates-Gards see it?

I wonder if they ever will. I wonder in twenty years when they look back, will they think of themselves as heroes or mourn the time they wasted.

Thank you for the mention of Vincent McAviney on Twitter, his coverage is in more depth than JR's. Several things he's mentioned that make no apparent sense do on VA's twitter feed. The call is being re made between parents' expert and GOSH as first one was not wanted by Armstrong.

Nothing can be more comfortable for Charlie than where he is right now. Nothing.

Everything else would be less comfortable and more stressful for him. And if the visiting physicians (not on GOSH's side) both believers they elicited pain responses from Charlie then his comfort HAS to be the only consideration here.

It's about what is best for Charlie, not who gets the last word

You'd think so, wouldn't you? Sadly, though, it doesn't seem to be the case