Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If the parents can take him and the hospital or doctors are willing to accept him, then go for it. I don't understand this case - it's like the state is overriding the parents - KNOWING that the baby is going to die in the care of the state's medical system. Why on earth the parents aren't being allowed to make this decision is totally beyond me.
If the parents can take him and the hospital or doctors are willing to accept him, then go for it. I don't understand this case - it's like the state is overriding the parents - KNOWING that the baby is going to die in the care of the state's medical system. Why on earth the parents aren't being allowed to make this decision is totally beyond me.
The thing is the parents can't just pick Charlie up and hop on a plane to the US. His life support system plus a doctor and/or nurse(s) would have to go with him... a) to get to the airport, and b) to get on the plane, which also might have to be modified in some part to accommodate him and his support team.
The life support system belongs to the NHS and the doctor/nurse(s) are employed by the NHS. So even if the parents could get the court judgement overturned, who pays the bill for his transport costs, including flying the equipment and medical staff back home and paying their wages?
If the parents can take him and the hospital or doctors are willing to accept him, then go for it. I don't understand this case - it's like the state is overriding the parents - KNOWING that the baby is going to die in the care of the state's medical system. Why on earth the parents aren't being allowed to make this decision is totally beyond me.
If you knew that the child had irreversible brain damage meaning it will never have a life off a ventilator or any real consciousness would that improve your understanding?
The child isn't even as lucky as being in a long term coma, where there's even a remote possibility of waking to a normal life, or even any experimental cure. He has a mitochondrial genetic flaw which causes neural death, the sole hope is an experimental treatment that has not progressed for thus condition into testing on GM rodents, that may arrest or slow the neural death. There are no other forms of treatment, and there is little chance there will be in any time frame in his short life.
Parental rights are all very well, but, those rights do not extend into causing or extending suffering either medically or from any other cause. You would not expect a hospital to not provide typical treatment for leukemia at the parents request for only naturopathic remedies. This isn't any different, the parents wish to extend any suffering the child is experiencing on a goose chase cure, because they do not wish to accept the inevitable.
We would hope never to be in the position.... I can see both sides of this... and would we put a dog through agony to prolong a life not worth living.. I dont think so......but when its your own child maybe other things kick in to preseve life..... I wouldnt though like to think my child was suffering in any way if it cant ever be cured... Doctors arent god either and do make mistakes as weve seen in the past with decisions.. but Im so glad I wont have to make one like these parents..
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 5 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,189 posts, read 13,482,880 times
Reputation: 19519
The whole case hinges on expert medical opinion and the law which states that the welfare of the child must come first and foremost rather than just the parents wishes.
Great Ormond Street Hospital do not believe the new evidence changes anthing ut had submitted it to the High Court for an Indpendent decision. It should be noted that Thursdays decision will most probably be finally, as the Surpeme Court and ECtHR have already made final rulings, so there is not much room for appeal.
It should also be noted that Charlie is now being given morphine for his pain.
Great Ormond Streets Statement;
Quote:
Originally Posted by Great Ormond Street Hospital
It will be for the High Court to make its judgment on the facts.
Charlie’s condition is exceptionally rare, with catastrophic and irreversible brain damage.
Our doctors have explored every medical treatment, including experimental nucleoside therapies. Independent medical experts agreed with our clinical team that this treatment would be unjustified.
Not only that, but they said it would be futile and would prolong Charlie’s suffering. This is not an issue about money or resources, but absolutely about what is right for Charlie.
Our view has not changed. We believe it is right to seek the High Court’s view in light of the claimed new evidence.
Our priority has always been, and will always be, the best interests of Charlie Gard.
The whole case hinges on expert medical opinion and the law which states that the welfare of the child must come first and foremost.
Didnt this happen a few years back with another child whos parents took over and were being hunted down to bring the child back...They took him for some pioneering treatment and was either cured or in remission... I cant remember the story right though...
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 5 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,189 posts, read 13,482,880 times
Reputation: 19519
Quote:
Originally Posted by dizzybint
Didnt this happen a few years back with another child whos parents took over and were being hunted down to bring the child back...They took him for some pioneering treatment and was either cured or in remission... I cant remember the story right though...
I think you mean the King case in relation to a hospital in Southampton, the case being very different and involving a very different scenario to Charlie's case.
This case was very different, Ashya had been diagnosed with a medulloblastoma, a type of brain tumour, which was successfully removed by the excellent surgeons in Southampton General Hospital and the hospital were going to start radiotherapy to lessen the chances of any cancer returning, indeed the parents were told the childs prognosis was very very good.
The parents decided to take the child to Spain for new proton therapy. the hospital became very concerned because the child had just had major brain surgery snd it was important that the child received continued treatment.
The parents were arrested in Spain, however the child received the proton bea, treatment and is doing well, just as the hospital that carried out the surgery in the UK said he would if given traditional radiotherapy.
It should be noted that Proton beam therapy is just a different type of radiotherapy, using high energy beam of protons rather than high energy X-rays to deliver a dose of radiotherapy. It also should be noted that both the Christie Hospital in Manchester and University College London Hospital (UCLH) now have proton machines and such treatment is available on the NHS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBC
An expert's view
It is very gratifying to hear that he is in remission, and if time goes on and he holds that remission, hopefully that equates with cure.
I do not agree that he could not have been in a similar situation had he had orthodox X-ray radiotherapy, which is going on to a very high standard in all the departments in this country.
That's not to say there are no advantages of protons, but I think we could have achieved the remission he is in now with standard radiotherapy.
This country sends approximately 150 selected children to the United States for proton beam radiotherapy every year, so we recognise the advantages and send that number of children abroad for protons.
To the credit of the NHS, we are funding two cyclotron-based proton systems for this country, in London and in Manchester.
Dr Nick Plowman, senior clinical oncologist at Great Ormond Street children's hospital, talking to BBC Radio 4's World At One
Read the High Court judgment here, and the Court of Appeal's judgment here. The Supreme Court's judgment can be read here and the the European Court of Human Rights decision here.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
