Charlie Gard's parents finally give up fight to save their 11-month-old boy as they blame Great Ormond Street doctors for not letting him fly to US in January

[mystery-ak]

'Poor Charlie. It is too late. The damage has been done.' Charlie Gard's parents finally give up fight to save their 11-month-old boy as they blame Great Ormond Street doctors for not letting him fly to US in January

    Parents Connie Yates and Chris Gard arrived at High Court looking heartbroken
    Couple have now decided to let their little boy 'slip away' at Great Ormond Street
    High Court had been due to hear two full days of evidence today and tomorrow
    Will decide whether the 11-month-old should be allowed to try therapy in the US
    But the hearing today will now be shorter, beginning at 2pm instead of 10am

By Sam Greenhill Chief Reporter For The Daily Mail and Martin Robinson, Uk Chief Reporter For Mailonline

Published: 17:00 EDT, 23 July 2017 | Updated: 09:35 EDT, 24 July 2017


Charlie Gard will be allowed to die after his parents today made the heartbreaking decision to let him 'slip away'.

Chris Gard and Connie Yates arrived at the High Court in tears as they ended a campaign to save his life that has touched millions around the world.

They have battled for six months for their beloved 11-month-old son to be flown to the US for pioneering drugs to treat his rare strain of mitochondrial disease. 

But they have now decided to let him die clearly believing that Great Ormond Street's refusal to let him travel to a New York hospital had cost him his chance.

Grant Armstrong, for the parents, told High Court judge Mr Justice Francis: 'Poor Charlie. It is too late. The damage has been done. Sadly time has run out.

'Sadly the window of opportunity no longer exists. The parents have taken an extremely hard decision.'

more
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4723092/Charlie-Gard-s-fate-decided-TODAY.html?ito=social-facebook

[Joe Wooten]

Those judges and NHS officials responsible for this should be brought up on murder charges.

[Rivergirl]

Joe, the baby was born with major health issues that could not be remedies.  Sometimes there is no one to blame altho human nature gives some people  desire to cast blame on things that cannot be explained or corrected.

[Oceander]

Joe, the baby was born with major health issues that could not be remedies.  Sometimes there is no one to blame altho human nature gives some people  desire to cast blame on things that cannot be explained or corrected.

But the U.K. wouldn't even let them try.  Is that the right thing to do?

[Just_Victor]

But the U.K. wouldn't even let them try.  Is that the right thing to do?

There's no excuse for the UK government to hold the child hostage, and refuse to allow the parents to seek remedies on their own.  Even if the child would have died anyway, the parents should have been allowed to try to save his life.  The NHS bears responsibility for that decision and the effective death sentence that they handed down to that child.

[XenaLee]

There's no excuse for the UK government to hold the child hostage, and refuse to allow the parents to seek remedies on their own.  Even if the child would have died anyway, the parents should have been allowed to try to save his life.  The NHS bears responsibility for that decision and the effective death sentence that they handed down to that child.

The death culture spreads its ugly, black and soul-less wings wider every day now.   The death cultists can't afford to let even one soul go.  So much for freedom in the UK.  Thank God we got away from those twits.

[Joe Wooten]

The death culture spreads its ugly, black and soul-less wings wider every day now.   The death cultists can't afford to let even one soul go.  So much for freedom in the UK.  Thank God we got away from those twits.

They are in power here too. Just not total power like in the UK.

[Oceander]

The death culture spreads its ugly, black and soul-less wings wider every day now.   The death cultists can't afford to let even one soul go.  So much for freedom in the UK.  Thank God we got away from those twits.

Doing the same here is part and parcel of nationalizing health care via Obamacare. 

[Joe Wooten]

Joe, the baby was born with major health issues that could not be remedies.  Sometimes there is no one to blame altho human nature gives some people  desire to cast blame on things that cannot be explained or corrected.

It was the parents choice to try treatment in the US. Those officials who denied the parents control should pay a price for their power trip. Otherwise this kind of crap will only get worse.

[HonestJohn]

Who was going to pay for the infant's plane trip and treatment?

If the NHS wasn't on the hook for that, then they shouldn't have had any say in the matter.

But if the parents were expecting that the NHS would pay for part or all of this, then they did have a right to speak.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Joe, the baby was born with major health issues that could not be remedies.  Sometimes there is no one to blame altho human nature gives some people  desire to cast blame on things that cannot be explained or corrected.

@Rivergirl parents have the right to pray and work for a miracle.  It's not up to the state to tell parents, or anyone, that such a fight is not allowed.

I'd fight for your right to do the same.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Who was going to pay for the infant's plane trip and treatment?

If the NHS wasn't on the hook for that, then they shouldn't have had any say in the matter.

But if the parents were expecting that the NHS would pay for part or all of this, then they did have a right to speak.

Transportation was to paid for by good Samaritans in Britain and the US; care was to be provided at no cost.

The hospital would not discharge the child or provide the breathing apparatus needed to keep the child alive during the trip.

The British death panel deemed this life to be subpar and unworthy of further medical attention---from anyone, anywhere in the world.

They simply ran out the clock so his brain was damaged beyond the limits of even experimental medical care.

[Applewood]

Prayers lifted up for Charlie and his family.   

[Wingnut]

This was how it was always going to end.   Anything else or any other outcome was just bullshit.

[Suppressed]

Who was going to pay for the infant's plane trip and treatment?

If the NHS wasn't on the hook for that, then they shouldn't have had any say in the matter.

But if the parents were expecting that the NHS would pay for part or all of this, then they did have a right to speak.

@HonestJohn

This was more than a question of costs.  It was a question of the patient's best interests.

I know many disagree with me, but the patient's wishes are paramount and should always be respected.  Unfortunately, the patient couldn't speak for himself, so the court decided what was in the best interests of the person who had no voice.  The decision by the appointed guardian, and multiple levels of courts, was based on the facts that the infant could be feeling pain and had little chance of recovery.

Generally, I believe parents should have the right to decide their child's care.  And I believe the UK government does, too.

But there are cases where parents make decisions that aren't in their children's best interests.  And the courts decided that this was one of those cases.

[Applewood]

This was how it was always going to end.   Anything else or any other outcome was just bullshit.

Maybe so.  But if I was this little boy's parent. I don't know what I would have done.  Maybe I would have wanted to move heaven and earth in an attempt to save him, however futile it might have been.  It is unsettling to know that in this case the state, not the parents, had the final say.  I suppose under socialized medicine, your children belong to the state, not you.   

[Suppressed]

Maybe so.  But if I was this little boy's parent. I don't know what I would have done.  Maybe I would have wanted to move heaven and earth in an attempt to save him, however futile it might have been.  It is unsettling to know that in this case the state, not the parents, had the final say.  I suppose under socialized medicine, your children belong to the state, not you.   

The same in the US.  If parents don't care for their children the way society approves, then society steps in legally.  This isn't "socialized medicine".

[Mom MD]

Maybe so.  But if I was this little boy's parent. I don't know what I would have done.  Maybe I would have wanted to move heaven and earth in an attempt to save him, however futile it might have been.  It is unsettling to know that in this case the state, not the parents, had the final say.  I suppose under socialized medicine, your children belong to the state, not you.   

Parents should have the right to decide and that should trump all.  However the insurance company has a right to say they are no longer paying for futile care at some point.   This poor child was being tortured and I'm glad he is at peace finally.  There are no good or easy answers here.