Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Charlie Gard 17 re started

999 replies

muckypup73 · 25/07/2017 20:39

Ok guys, we have been very lucky to discuss this, please lets not give anyone anything to complain about, Mhq have been more than accomodating.

OP posts:
Dustbunny1900 · 26/07/2017 00:12

To be fair. Nobody over here in the us has any idea who charlie gard is, or would really care if they knew, besides the extreme right. So the few crazies who post don't really represent the majority here.

I don't think Connie is unintelligent. Just very emotionally immature. and channeling her grief into anger and activism. This isn't meant as a "slight" to her, just observation.

Headofthehive55 · 26/07/2017 00:13

bubbkes it's not that he hasn't had options, but pushing for options tends to open doors for others.

CremeFresh · 26/07/2017 00:14

I know it's possible to discharge oneself from hospital against medical advice , would C&C be able to discharge Charlie and just take him home ?

Headofthehive55 · 26/07/2017 00:15

I think as a parent you are programmed to care for your child. Fir most if us that consists of washing, dressing, feeding.
Fir those parents perhaos care is in the form of campaigning.

Dontlaugh · 26/07/2017 00:16

Charlie as an individual, dependent and child deserves dignity, respect and honour.
He has been through a tremendous amount physically, emotionally and legally. Mostly without his knowledge.
The best and most loving tribute to him would be to allow his parents privacy to cherish their last moments with him, wherever that is.
And perhaps if those who would wish to, to donate to a charity dealing with end of life care for children. I won't specify any, but there are many.

DorotheaBeale · 26/07/2017 00:17

she said she felt Charlie really deteriorated when they 'made her stop Breastfeeding

I seem to remember reading somewhere that Charlie was unable to breastfeed any longer because of his increasing muscle weakness and breathing difficulties. So having to stop breastfeeding was because of his deterioration, not the other way around

Sirzy · 26/07/2017 00:17

As he is under a court order and the judge has said that he is not to leave GOSH without his consent then no they can't just discharge him. Even if they did try to they wouldn't get very far without all the machines anyway.

JayneAusten · 26/07/2017 00:18

I know it's possible to discharge oneself from hospital against medical advice , would C&C be able to discharge Charlie and just take him home ?

The question here is different because the question really is would they be allowed to take his body home after passing away - because obviously he'd have to be extubated first and as far as I'm aware, he would then pass within minutes. :( I am not sure about the rules for babies but I do know that you can choose to have your loved ones at home with you for a certain period of time after death.

Greenifer · 26/07/2017 00:19

I know it's possible to discharge oneself from hospital against medical advice , would C&C be able to discharge Charlie and just take him home ?

As he will die immediately, once removed from the invasive ventilation that he is currently receiving, there would not be any point, would there?

ArmySal · 26/07/2017 00:21

I don't think they're of low intelligence, I believe they're grief crazed, tired, and angrily lashing out.

It's just awful all round.

FlowerSour · 26/07/2017 00:22

I'm sorry but I find it uncomfortable talking about what will happen to poor Charlie after he has passed or what the parents can/can't do with his body. Others may disagree but it seems inappropriate to discuss that. But it might just be me, so I'm sorry if I'm over reacting.

ArmySal · 26/07/2017 00:23

I agree Flower. No need to go there.

Isadora2007 · 26/07/2017 00:24

I wondered if that has been offered. Not to discharge but to allow them to have him home with a cold mattress thing (they use in special cold cots for babies who are stillborn) after he dies.
I'm confused about the demand to have him die in his own cot anyway- surely in his parents arms in the least physical distress regardless of the venue would be preferable?

CremeFresh · 26/07/2017 00:24

Greenifer sadly no , he wouldn't survive for long , it was a daft question which I realised after I hit post.Blush

stealtheatingtunnocks · 26/07/2017 00:24

My boy's 12 now, all jaggy knees and elbows now, but, he was a poorly wee runt of a specimen. For all the worry and challenges we had to deal with, was nothing compared to what Charlie's family have dealt with, and, we always had hope.

I can see why they'd want him home. I can see why they'd rage. Poor buggers.

FlowerSour · 26/07/2017 00:28

I honestly just hope the parents can have some kind of closure when this is all over. If they sue GOSH, they'll cause themselves more pain as well. I know you never get over the death of a child obviously, but I feel like having more court hearings, etc... will mean the pain is constantly stirred up. And the media will continue. I want them to be able to grieve in peace. They need that and deserve that.

JayneAusten · 26/07/2017 00:29

I actually agree re discussions of him dying and afterwards, but the reason I answered the question is that it was perpetuating this myth that Great Ormond Street are doing something to 'stop' Charlie from going home. All they're doing is keeping him alive - which they can't do at his house. This 'Can't they just take him home in spite of GOSH?' type question needed to be answered to point out that if they take him away from GOSH they take him away from any further sustaining of his life.

CremeFresh · 26/07/2017 00:31

Anger is an easier emotion to deal with than emotional pain. I hope they get the support they need when this is all over.

smilingmind · 26/07/2017 00:32

I also don't think they are unintelligent. Possibly lacking in the critical thinking that has been mentioned previously on these threads. Although in these circumstances it is very difficult to form an opinion as to who they really are.
But they have been misguided and have chosen to believe the false promises they have been fed, as they offer hope, and thus have had no recourse but to reject the reality offered by GOSH.
They deserve our pity, my pity, but like most of us I find it very hard to give at times.

JayneAusten · 26/07/2017 00:32

I agree re closure. I pray that they choose to access some very good counselling, if they're not already. Right now they've spent a long time focused on the fight and I guess the adrenaline has kept them going to an extent, and the hope it would seem, but it's the afterwards that is the scary abyss. I look at them on the news and they just look so full of pain and tension - as if the situation wasn't horrendous enough, imagine sitting through court for all the hours they have done. This next bit was never going to be anything short of dreadful, but I'm scared about how ill they might make themselves if they try to fight any more.

FlowerSour · 26/07/2017 00:35

I understand why you had to answer the question and I wasn't trying to blame anyone. Blush It just didn't sit right with me, but I understand that this a hard topic in general and obviously some aspects are distressing. And that's the nature of the whole case.

And that makes me think that if it's distressing for us to discuss it, thing how hard it is for the parents to live this everyday. Which is why I'd never criticise Chris and Connie, for I can't imagine the pain they are in.

That goes for anyone else who has had or has a terminally ill child. I understand there were a few posters who had lost children and I've said it before, but my heart goes out to you. And I hope this case has not brought up bad memories for anyone. Losing a child is something no parent should ever have to go through.

CremeFresh · 26/07/2017 00:39

The bottom line is that they are desperate parents who don't want to lose their child. Sad

Doubledottvremote · 26/07/2017 00:39

That poor poor baby. The hospital is his familiar setting that's home to him. Being moved around for someone else's gain seems so cruel. I hope of they do move him he will be given extra morphine. Home would be very hard...if they expect to be able to bath him etc while still on a vent. And when does someone then have to say stop. A hospice at least would be more controlled and has a cold cot so could have time after. I'd just feel for the other parents whose children are at end of life there if they have to deal with the press outside etc. Aside from the practical side and Charlie's pain/stability I think going home would cause real issues with potential non compliance with medical staff etc.

FetchezLaVache · 26/07/2017 00:39

I can't imagine how it's justifiable to even move Charlie to a hospice, to be honest. I recognise the needs of the parents as being so important - but they're not more important than the needs of Charlie. Surely if there is any risk at all of him suffering a painful death in transit then they just cannot afford to transport him?

I agree completely, JayneAusten. It sounds like such a delicate process with so much that could potentially go wrong, I can't see what's in it for poor Charlie at all.

FlowerSour · 26/07/2017 00:39

Also agree they're not unintelligent.

It's grief, many months of stress, dashed hopes, confused emotions, trauma, different medical options, the media, the Army encouraging them, the money making things seem 'possible.'

All of this combined seems to have led to the current situation. I don't think they're stupid at all. They seem to think Charlie genuinely had a chance.

I don't think you can pinpoint 'why.' Perhaps it was a thread of hope that helped them to cope?

Only they know why they continue to believe what GOSH say is not true.

Swipe left for the next trending thread