Baby Charlie Has Another Shot at Life But the U.K. Court Gets to Decide

0
Charlie’s parents.

The Orwellian U.K. machine that plays god and usurps the power of parents to decide if their child lives or dies has had a change of heart. Charle Gard will be allowed to live a little  longer. He might even get that treatment his parents want to pay for.

London’s Great Ormand Street Hospital has reconsidered their decision to terminate Charlie Gard because, they claim, there is new information.

Charlie, 11 months old, has a rare and debilitating genetic condition that has no cure, and the hospital had said that letting him die was the only humane option to end his potential pain and suffering, the NY Times reported. He is now paralyzed and cannot see or hear.

Charlie’s mother began raising money months ago, before he deteriorated, to bring Charlie to the United States for an experimental treatment. She asked in the video that accompanied the plea why shouldn’t she be allowed to do everything she can to save her baby’s life. Many agreed with her and she accumulate over $1.3 million, but the hospital and the EU appeals court would not allow her to make that decision.

Things changed on Friday

“Two international hospitals and their researchers have communicated to us as late as the last 24 hours that they have fresh evidence about their proposed experimental treatment,” the hospital said in the statement. “And we believe, in common with Charlie’s parents, it is right to explore this evidence.”

This information was known and they are being disingenuous. While the treatments might not save his life or improve it, why can’t the parents make that decision?

The boy’s parents are convinced that an experimental therapy, developed by a neurologist in the United States, may help their son recover some functions. The hospital says it’s not possible.

However, nothing will happen any time soon. The hospital has appealed to the EU High Court to look at the alleged “new evidence”. It’s another delay as Charlie’s condition worsens.

It’s not about the money, but it is about socialized medicine

The hospital says their decision has nothing to do “with money or resources” but rather, what is “right for Charlie”. At this point, that’s undoubtedly true. However, socialized medicine takes the decision from the patient and the patient’s guardians about who lives and who dies.

Socialized medicine says they have that right even if they are not paying for it.

One of the two hospitals that contacted the U.K. hospital appears to be NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Medical Center. On Thursday, that hospital offered to treat the child, either as an inpatient in New York or by shipping the unapproved drug for the experimental treatment to the hospital in London.

“There is potential for him to be a completely normal boy, but we don’t know, as you just don’t know until you try,” Connie Yates, Charlie’s mother, said, adding, “There’s around a 10 percent chance of this working for Charlie.” That’s her view, right or wrong, we can’t say.

It doesn’t matter says the scholar

Claire Fenton-Glynn, a legal scholar at the University of Cambridge, said that the last-ditch offers of help were not legally relevant.

“The central issue in this case is not the availability of treatment — there has always been a U.S. hospital willing to treat him — but, rather, that the courts have determined it is not in Charlie’s best interest,” she said.

That is the problem. The courts are deciding, not the parents. This isn’t a case of them refusing to care for their child. They apparently care too much for a socialized system that has lost its heart.

Kenneth Prager, a professor of medicine and director of clinical ethics at Columbia University, who is not involved in the case, argued that the parents’ wishes should not be brushed aside. The evidence on pain is unclear, he said. “Unless the parents are abusive, I think it is dangerous for society to arrogate to itself the power to override parental wishes and have the child die when they are clearly loving parents willing to expend time and resources to help their child,” he said, according to the NY Times.

The parents had prepared for Charlie’s death until the White House intervened, the NY Times report says.

Euthanasia is illegal for a reason.