Charlie Gard

It is clear that the parents have lost faith in the medical staff - probably because they simply did not want to believe what they were being told - and who can blame them? Such sad news.

It is unlikely that they will feel comfortable with anything now suggested by GOSH, even though the staff are falling over themselves to try and accommodate the parents' wishes.

And all this in the glare of publicity - how good it would be if the media were simply to back off. I know the argument would proceed on social media anyway - but how good it would be to see the BBC and responsible print publications simply acknowledging that their involvement is just making things worse.

These poor young parents cannot possibly have known what they were getting themselves into when it all went to court. I feel so sorry for them - a dying child is quite enough misery without them having to be in the spotlight all the time.

I'm sorry, I should have read back but this is my first chance to get on here since first thing this morning and it has been going through my mind all day. Glad to hear I am not a monster! Life is so unfair but sadly it just is sometimes.

I am sure the hospital is use to dealing with grief and the irrational thoughts and actions which are often part of grief.

What a very sensible and compassionate Judge this is. He has said that in similar cases in the future, where parents and hospital staff disagree they should have to go into mediation to avoid legal proceedings. He has also commented on the cuts to legal aid (voted on by MPs) which left Charlie's parents not entitled to legal aid.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.aol.co.uk/news/2017/07/24/judge-who-oversaw-charlie-gard-legal-dispute-hopes-lessons-can-b/amp/

I must admit I was surprised to read the parents want to have Charlie at home for a week, presumably before letting him die. They must still be convinced he's not suffering. One thing that won't happen even though it's one of the reasons why they want to take Charlie home, is that the media will give them space. The media will camp outside where ever the family are, no matter what the parents want.

I agree with you gracesgran. I find it especially disturbing that the doctor who suggested this treatment might work had not initially disclosed his financial interest in the company producing the particular drug to be used. And, as we all know, medicine and healthcare is big business in the US and some doctors seem to have few qualms about how they make their money. Much has been written about the suspiciously high levels of very expensive but unnecessary medical procedures that are carried out there. Meanwhile, those who have no insurance are denied proper healthcare.

I respect that they are distressed but I think it is time to stop. To go on adding a few days here, and this and that there does nothing to help the parents to let go.

I also take the point about making facities available for young children who may need and actually be able to benefit from GOSH's ITU.

I did wonder if some of those involved with the American pro-life group actually had any idea how the NHS works and the care this child has been given Eloethan. There really is no reason why they should generally, but before you try and interfere in another countries justice system you should certainly learn about it.

I apologise for not being competent to do links. The Judgement covering the period from the GOSH application to the Court in early July is now available on line. If anyone can give a link, it summarises matters concisely. It covers interventions by the Vatican, President Trump and the US doctor who offered treatment without having examined the baby, or read his medical notes, despite this having been suggested by GOSH in January. The Judge is positive and compassionate about the parents. He sets out clearly the reasons why the law in this country is focussed on the best interests of the child.
He points out it isn't for the JudiciAry to get involved in politics but suggests he doesn't believe that when parliament reduced the availability of legal aid, it hadn't intended to leave parents in this kind of situation without legal aid. The parents' legal team worked without payment.

As the law worked in Cleveland ? Wrong diagnosis by paediatricians , then the courts acted on this diagnosis

Great Ormond Street Hospital -v- Yates and Gard judgment 24 July 2017

I think this is it Iam. Thank you for flagging it up.

Annie - I'm not saying our Children Act is perfect. no one and nothing is perfect. It isn't appropriate to get into the complexity of Cleveland or Rochdale here. This is about the tragedy of this little boy and his loved ones, the doctors, nurses and the legal system which no one would chose as the route to resolve disputes like this. The Judge recommends that in future similar cases, mediation is attempted, in the same way that now happens in private and public law cases before they get to Court. He recognises that it may not resolve but may ensure the parties have a greater understanding of each other's position.
Does anyone have a solution that would be least worse than our current one (goes without saying. Legal aid to be available, mediation to be accepted by all pRties)

Sorry Annie I do know you mean well but your playing Devil's advocate has gone on too long.

annsixty, I don't care what you think, I look at the child's suffering and the parents suffering, how easy some here think it easy to let go and how easy to think calmly and logicaly when swamped in grief . Well it is not .

And please do not tell me my posts on this thread have gone on too long.

Oh dear Annie I meant absolutely no offence to you at all.I have no intention of criticizing how often you post
Just sometimes the content.
We are both equally entitled to our views.

Anniebach, that is why in cases like this the Court steps in as they are removed from the problem and can look at it in a fair way to all sides, above all the child's. We all feel the deep emotions involved in cases like this but emotion sometimes blurs the line for the best way forward for the child whose welfare is paramount here. And sometimes, in very sad cases like this one, even the parents want someone else to make the final decision as it helps them cope with the grief and guilt.

If you believe we are entitled to our own views why the need to tell me my voicing of my views have gone on to long?

I really think the parents have been under veiled criscism by some on this thread ,I have not told anyone they have gone on too long

So easy to sit at the computer, read the papers, listen to news coverage and reach a verdict on these parents in a calm, clear minded way isn't it?

So very sad for this family. & anyone else who has been faced with such a heartbreaking situation. I don't really think anyone else should be passing any comment(about the dos & dont's of the medical decision , The Pope, Donald Trump ??)other than offering absolute sympathy to the family. Many people will be deeply moved to support the family, but many many more people suddenly become experts & crusaders, jumping on a bandwagon that they don't in reality have the faintest idea about. They may presume they are helping , sadly the only thing that will eventually help this family is continued love ,support & help to accept the very sad reality of their tragic circumstances.Certainly shouldn't have Grannetters using it to trade insults to each other ?

Then Devro you have 100% faith in the courts, I do not.

So ab, you don't have confidence in either the medical profession or the courts, how wouyld you have had the problem resolved?

would

Please stop this personalisation of someone else's tragedy

The parents want to take Charlie home but is that in Charlie's best interests? All the disturbance for a child so poorly who is going to die in the next few days?
Charlie will not know 'home' or 'his own cot' as he has been in hospital for so long hospital is all he knows.

I hope that doesn't sound harsh, but moving this poor child now is probably not the best thing for him even if it gives the parents some kind of comfort, and Charlie is the one who is of paramount importance. He deserves a peaceful death without the trauma of being moved.

I am not trying to sound like an expert btw.

Will the move be a trauma Jalima? If the little mite is so severely brain damaged will he know distress, fear etc? I am not saying he should be taken home but am questioning the reasons for not allowing this