Parents fight plan for Charlie Gard to spend last days in hospice

Ajustar Comentario Impresión

How does the disease affect Charlie? According to McLeod's statement, families have been "harassed and discomforted" while visiting their children, and that some of the harassment has occurred within the walls of the hospital itself.

It is likely that Mr Justice Francis will then decide whether Charlie will be able to leave Great Ormond Street Hospital and die at home.

His parents fought a valiant, but ultimately futile legal battle to have their son treated with an experimental treatment that has reportedly had some success in other cases. Gard said that it was no longer in his son's best interest to seek treatment, and that they have made a decision to let him go and "be with the angels".

She said Great Ormond Street staff had found an "excellent hospice" which would give Charlie and his parents the space, privacy and protection they needed.

But it was announced on July 24 that Charlie's parents were ending their legal fight and had withdrawn their application from the High Court.

"We return to the court for perhaps the most hard emotional part of this case - the circumstances in which Charlie's passing will be conducted".

Pope Francis and Donald Trump had offered their sympathies and any help. Unfortunately, the results revealed that Charlie's condition has left him with irreversible damage.

Below is the full statement issued in the High Court on Tuesday afternoon on behalf of the hospital (GOSH).

It comes a day after Charlie's parents dropped their legal battle to take their terminally ill child to the United States for experimental treatment.

Chris Gard said it was time to let Charlie go and "be with the angels". "It seems really upsetting after everything we've been through to deny us this".

Ms Butler-Cole said Charlie would need a "full paediatric intensive care team" - including four to six nurses - if he was to spend days at home receiving life-support treatment. Time has been wasted. "Had Charlie been given the treatment sooner he would have had the potential to be a normal, healthy little boy".

"There has got to be a better way". It's now unfortunately too late for him but it's not too late for others with this frightful disease and other diseases.

However, Britain's courts backed by the European Court of Human Rights have refused permission on the grounds it would prolong his suffering without any realistic prospect it would help the 11-month-old child. "We have always believed that Charlie deserved a chance at life".

Lawyers for Great Ormond Street said bosses had suggested mediation, but added that Charlie's parents had not wished to use the services of a mediator. A "global conversation has now been ignited" about the rights of parents, not governments, to determine what's best for their children.

Kennedy contests that while parents' views concerning what is best for their child should "usually" be honored, society should "intervene", via the judicial system, if experts disagree. "The parents wish to treasure their remaining time with Charlie, however short that may be".

Editor's Note: This piece was originally published by The Daily Signal.