Charlie Gard 20

[CremeFresh]

Don't know if anyone else has started a new thread .

nina2b

Fergus Walsh' reports were well-balanced

The website - not so much.

Bubbles it worried me that even well educated friends of mine had not scraped the surface whatsoever in this case to try and find out the detail or truth. I have been exasperated over it I really have, god knows what the less well educated read (or don't possibly). I try and buy The Guardian and The ~Times but read most stuff on here which is a real shift in terms of sources.

The only petition I will sign is the one that says bad reporting by our media including the BBC should be outlawed.

Isn't control of the media the act of a dictatorship?

Delurking. I have been following these threads from time to time and have been grateful for the discussion in terms of contribution from HCPs, legal practitioners and parents who have suffered the loss of their children. I have not lost a child but I am acquainted with deep grief through the loss of close family members. I feel for 'Connie and Chris for their loss and send them kind thoughts. Their journey will be a long one and they will never forget little Charlie. I hope in time that the pain and bitterness will diminish. I also hope that in time they will come to realise that in reality Charlie could never have been a normal little boy and that their belief in the efficacy of the treatment was misplaced. For whatever reason Dr Hirano gave them false hope. It may have been a different medical culture i.e in the USA doctors will treat as long as patients can pay, who knows. But it could never have been right to use Charlie as a guinea pig on an untested medicine. I am thinking now of the Northwick Park 6.

As a mother I understand their plight but would not support any motion to reduce the powers of the Children Act. I do not hold that parents always know best and arguably Connie and Chris were too emotionally involved to determine what was right for little Charlie.

With regard to the troubles in NI I am old enough to remember how it was reported. I certainly knew of the atrocities carried out by the DUP. I read widely and critically and I certainly remember it being reported on the BBC. So I agree with you BubblesBudy

I think too that a lot of news reporting is sm driven and moves fast and as a result is less thoughtful. I listen more to the reporting of correspondents rather than the headlines.

The BBC walks on a tight rope as both left and right have accused it of political bias. As a result perhaps it is not as bold as it could be. Also those of other media interests would seek to emasculate the BBC. I am thinking of Rupert Murdoch and the constant attacks on it in the pages of the Daily Fail. I think I would prefer the BBC for all its faults rather than those of Fox etc

We don't really know what set the chain of events off that made the relationship go sour.
Saying that Gosh is a wonderful hospital, wonderful staff, looking at the parents experience with Martha as posted by kestral doesn't mean that Charlie's parents experienced sensitive similar care.

Our experience at times was poor from an excellent hospital. It doesn't stop the hospital being largely excellent, just that sometime it didn't get it right.

Ohall - Agreed. I generally find BBC news inspid.

In my job I have experienced both tabloid and broadsheet write stories based on a ludicrous social media post without checking the source and both getting it massively wrong.

I posted when Dr Hirano came over to examine Charlie that I hoped that he would explain to C&C that there was never any possibility that Charlie might have been "a normal boy". I think he is the only one they might have accepted this from.

It looks as though he didn't do this.

I think the other problem we have is 24 hour media. There is no time given to reasoned debate by informed correspondents. It is all knee jerk reactions and get the public to phone in. This just makes false positions go round and round.

A classic example is the people who still demand to leave the EU right now. Immediately. They clearly have read nothing about the legal position we are in and all the years of intertwined laws and treaties that need to be disentangled. It is mind-boggling how everything is simplified to a sound-bite. It has been similar with Charlie.

I do hope that intelligent people can be persuaded to read about these court cases and why the child has the priority in law. At least no-one, yet, has said it is the fault of the EU!

I am not convinced C and C ever got past the miracle cure stage. They did not seem to take on board the awful results of the clinicians' meeting.

Yes, but Dr H was at that meeting.

In a side note, the DUP where not that closely linked with a paramilitary organisation - unlike SF and the IRA. There are a bunch of smaller parties, the PUP etc who are actually spokesman for loyalist organisations.

The DUP are a pretty backward political organisation but their level of intwinement with terrorist groups is less obvious that the others.

Yes. I know Dr H was at the meeting but CY was very surprised at info given in court. So
I felt she hadn't taken on board what the
awful situation for Charlie that they were discussing, despite being there. Having said that, I think it must have been extremely distressing.

I am not convinced C and C ever got past the miracle cure stage. They did not seem to take on board the awful results of the clinicians' meeting.

They also never seemed to understand that the legal proceedings were about what was best for Charlie, not a battle between them and GOSH, with GOSH out to stop them getting what they wanted. They didn't seem to be hearing their legal advisers (who presumably must have explained it to them) or indeed the judge, any more than they heard what the doctors were telling them.

I agree Bubbles, I think they wanted to believe it so much so screened out anything said to the contrary.

I don't think anything hirano said (that they did not believe themselves) would have made any difference, it wasn't taken on board the first time he said it or what the other doctors not associated w gosh said. They were determined.

They were determined.
I hope they are not as equally determined to sue GOSH or to amend the Children Act.

I always felt they believed the court cases were about them not getting what they wanted too. I do not think this state of affairs will help in the future either because other parents may also wish to "fight" against those who they think are wrong in hospitals. I do hope I am wrong and that a way can be found to prevent this happening. If C and C do intend to fund a "parents rights" campaign, we will not hear the last of it. We need to preserve the position of the child as we do at the moment. At least the child is seen as an independent human being not "owned" by parents, however much they are loved.

To my mind using the money for some kind of Charlie's law would be so negative and based upon bitterness and anger. A fund to aid research into Charlie's form of MDS would be so positive and help other babies. It would be such a tribute to their son. I do hope they can find peace.

What can they sue GOSH for? Not agreeing with them? Negligence? Again, it might make them feel better if they are "fighting"
but it is going to fail. In addition I hate NHS Trusts having to spend our money defending themselves.

No-one who knows anything agreed with them over the Children's' Act. It would be virtually impossible to get an amendment to this to favour parents over children. I do hope they have more sense and can see past their own feelings.

I always felt they believed the court cases were about them not getting what they wanted too.

It was very telling what Connie shouted out in court this week at the GOSH barrister: "Let us get what we want for once!"

On the other hand I welcome parents and patients questioning care in hospitals.
To return to a situation where no one spoke out and no one dared to question the consultant I think would be detrimental.

I hope they can't sue for negligence BubblesBuddy. It's just from what they were saying at the beginning of the week about time being wasted and it being too late for Charlie to have the treatment, it sounded as though they were setting themselves up for another lawsuit.