Doctors can withdraw baby's life support

[ProfessorDavey]

His parents want him, alive, not dead.
That is bollocks.

His parents want him alive, rather than dead. I agree with his parents.

But the key issue isn't whether his parents want him alive or not, but that is in the best interests of the child. In most cases the parents' view is taken as, by default, in the child's best interests, but not always. In those cases it is for the courts to decide what is in the childs best interests. In this case they saw the treatment as being futile and that the travel and the treatment itself would cause unnecessary distress to the child, for no gain. I think the courts are correct as there is a vanishingly small likelihood of any benefit from the treatment (even the doctors in the US agree) and without doubt the travel etc will cause distress.

[Anchorman]

Because flying could cause further suffering, no matter how careful his care. And that is without the possibility of the unproven treatment making him suffer too.

All we see are pictures of an apparently peaceful sleeping baby. We've no idea of the reality of that baby's life.

Not only that.
In the very unlikely event that any treatment manages to stabilise the child's condition - though if there is severe brain damage no known treatment can reverse it - what happens if, on the child's return to these shores, there is no intensive care facility available at GOSH du to another child having an emergency?
Where does that leave the child - and the parents?
Financing life support in the States could easily use up all the funds raised.

[floo]

A very sad story, it must be awful for the poor parents. However, I feel it is right to withdraw life support in this case.

[Bubbles]

This sad situation is still going on.

Charlie Gard: Mum shares photo of son with eyes open
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40246370

Couldn't the doctors have tried an alternative treatment in all this time? We are now a couple of months down the line, and money was raised for his treatment.

What was the sense in denying him the chance using money donated in his name? When here we are 2 months later on, and nothing has been done one way or another.

 

[floo]

I still think it kinder to the child to withdraw treatment and let nature take its course as I said before.

[floo]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40479074

[Nearly Sane]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40479074

Populists and papulists being populist.

[wigginhall]

I think in the US, parental rights supersede children's rights, but not here under human rights' laws.   But there are tons of American comments saying how the NHS are murdering a child, whereas good old US private health would save him.   Sure.

[Rhiannon]

The money's there for him to be treated. The doctors that could do so say there's no point.

It's becoming a circus now. 

[wigginhall]

Yes, with Trump as Barnum.  So sick.

[Nearly Sane]

Mebbe Trump and Frankie could do a joint laying on of hands. I mean Charlie is small but Trump's hand are tiny and he likes tbe whole touching things together thing.

[floo]

That poor child should be permitted to die in peace.

[ProfessorDavey]

That poor child should be permitted to die in peace.

Absolutely.

[Shaker]

Have to agree.

I have to admit that I lose sympathy with those so far removed from the reality of the situation, even with parents and a child, that the inevitable is denied as the inevitable.

The little lad got a shit deal on the pointy end of random chance - we know what love is, you don't have to tell us - don't prolong the agony and make a terrible situation worse: make your peace, say your goodbyes and do the right and long overdue thing.

[Rhiannon]

I'm not judging the parents here, god knows, but I think hanging on is as much about their own fear of loss and what happens after. I feel for all three of them.

[Shaker]

I'm not judging the parents here, god knows, but I think hanging on is as much about their own fear of loss and what happens after. I feel for all three of them.

That I think is where my sympathy starts to erode - it becomes all about their terror of loss over the best 'deal' (so to speak) for the child.

[Nearly Sane]

Have to agree.

I have to admit that I lose sympathy with those so far removed from the reality of the situation, even with parents and a child, that the inevitable is denied as the inevitable.

The little lad got a shit deal on the pointy end of random chance - we know what love is, you don't have to tell us - don't prolong the agony and make a terrible situation worse: make your peace, say your goodbyes and do the right and long overdue thing.

much as I agree with your position, not sure that saying the parents are so far removed from the situation makes emotional or logical sense. Indeed surely it is their not being removed from the situation that is part of the problem?

[Rhiannon]

That I think is where my sympathy starts to erode - it becomes all about their terror of loss over the best 'deal' (so to speak) for the child.

And people in terror don't think rationally. I agree with NS, they can't be blamed. The state needs to be allowed to do what is right though.

[ProfessorDavey]

much as I agree with your position, not sure that saying the parents are so far removed from the situation makes emotional or logical sense. Indeed surely it is their not being removed from the situation that is part of the problem?

It is hard not to have sympathy for the parents - indeed I've no idea how I would react in a similar situation. It is understandable how they might clutch at any and every straw that they somehow have persuaded themselves will help their baby.

But that doesn't change the facts - which are that medical opinion on both sides of the Atlantic agree that there is nothing further that can help the baby, so any addition treatment would be futile and likely to cause unnecessary distress. Even those proposing the experimental treatment in the states are clear firstly that it will not provide a cure and secondly that there is no evidence of it helping in a similar situation. Further that several courts have considered the case and are in agreement that further treatment cannot be in the baby's best interests and should not, therefore, be permitted.

Where I have a problem is the media circus and voices from people who should know better effectively acting as cheerleading for futile treatment. In doing so they are not helping the parents to come to terms with the awful situation and its inevitable conclusion. They aren't helping anyone.

[floo]

It is indeed terrible for the parents, and I am sure none of us would want to face that situation. Doing what is right for the child is what is important; in this instance it is switching off the life support machine.

[ProfessorDavey]

It is indeed terrible for the parents, and I am sure none of us would want to face that situation. Doing what is right for the child is what is important; in this instance it is switching off the life support machine.

I agree - but it also means working with the parents to get them to accept the reality of the situation thereby allowing them to grieve - rather than to be tied up in anger, resentment and denial. That isn't helpful.

Sadly the 'noises off', whether from Trump or the Pope merely stoke up the fires of anger, resentment and denial and are deeply unhelpful.

[floo]

I agree - but it also means working with the parents to get them to accept the reality of the situation thereby allowing them to grieve - rather than to be tied up in anger, resentment and denial. That isn't helpful.

Sadly the 'noises off', whether from Trump or the Pope merely stoke up the fires of anger, resentment and denial and are deeply unhelpful.

Trump and the Pope should definitely keep out of it.

[floo]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40503842

[Gordon]

Seems the clinicians are having a re-think - let us hope this is good news for the wee fella.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40535043

[floo]

Just as long it isn't prolonging his life for no purpose.