This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/apr/12/parents-fighting-keep-sick-baby-alive-charlie-gard-appeal
The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 1 | Version 2 |
|---|---|
| Charlie Gard's parents have three weeks to challenge life support ruling | Charlie Gard's parents have three weeks to challenge life support ruling |
| (about 3 hours later) | |
| The parents of a sick baby boy have just under three weeks to decide if they wish to challenge a judge’s ruling that life support should be withdrawn from the infant, their solicitor has said. | The parents of a sick baby boy have just under three weeks to decide if they wish to challenge a judge’s ruling that life support should be withdrawn from the infant, their solicitor has said. |
| Contrary to reports, the parents of eight-month-old Charlie Gard, who has a rare genetic condition, have not yet decided whether they will appeal against Tuesday’s high court decision and have until 2 May to consider their options. | Contrary to reports, the parents of eight-month-old Charlie Gard, who has a rare genetic condition, have not yet decided whether they will appeal against Tuesday’s high court decision and have until 2 May to consider their options. |
| Specialists at Great Ormond Street hospital (GOSH) in central London told the court they believed it was time to stop providing life support for the baby and it was probable that Charlie was experiencing pain but unable to let anyone know. | Specialists at Great Ormond Street hospital (GOSH) in central London told the court they believed it was time to stop providing life support for the baby and it was probable that Charlie was experiencing pain but unable to let anyone know. |
| In his judgment, Mr Justice Francis said: “It is with the heaviest of hearts but with complete conviction for Charlie’s best interests that I find it is in Charlie’s best interests that I accede to these applications and rule that GOSH may lawfully withdraw all treatment save for palliative care to permit Charlie to die with dignity.” | In his judgment, Mr Justice Francis said: “It is with the heaviest of hearts but with complete conviction for Charlie’s best interests that I find it is in Charlie’s best interests that I accede to these applications and rule that GOSH may lawfully withdraw all treatment save for palliative care to permit Charlie to die with dignity.” |
| Laura Hobey-Hamsher, the solicitor for Charlie’s parents, Chris Gard and Connie Yates, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme her clients would be considering over the next three weeks whether their position had changed in light of what they had heard. | |
| The couple had hoped to fly Charlie to the US for a treatment trial, described by some as pioneering. However, Francis said no one with Charlie’s condition had ever been treated with the therapy proposed. The US doctor later acknowledged, after seeing documents about the severity of the condition, that it was “very unlikely” that Charlie would improve with that treatment. | The couple had hoped to fly Charlie to the US for a treatment trial, described by some as pioneering. However, Francis said no one with Charlie’s condition had ever been treated with the therapy proposed. The US doctor later acknowledged, after seeing documents about the severity of the condition, that it was “very unlikely” that Charlie would improve with that treatment. |
| But Hobey-Hamsher said challenging the court’s decision would be on a list of options to consider. She said: “The order that was made yesterday – with the agreement of the hospital – was the artificial ventilation will not be withdrawn while the parents are considering their options and their options will include the possibility of bringing an appeal to yesterday’s decision.” | |
| Asked what they would be considering, Hobey-Hamsher said: “It’s going carefully through the reasoning behind the judge’s decision. It’s thinking carefully about whether in light of what they have heard their position has changed and whether they continue to believe having access to this treatment is in Charlie’s best interests.” | |
| Hobey-Hamsher said the parents had hoped the judge would have ruled in favour of their application. “From their point of view, it was an incredibly straightforward question. Their son had the chance of treatment that might make him better, why wouldn’t the judge give them this opportunity,” she said. | |
| “There was a window that was open, a small window, but a window nonetheless. It wasn’t a 0% chance, it was a very small chance, but even a very small chance is still a chance.” | “There was a window that was open, a small window, but a window nonetheless. It wasn’t a 0% chance, it was a very small chance, but even a very small chance is still a chance.” |
| Charlie, who was born on 4 August, has mitochondrial depletion syndrome, a condition that causes progressive muscle weakness and brain damage. It is thought to affect just 16 children worldwide. | Charlie, who was born on 4 August, has mitochondrial depletion syndrome, a condition that causes progressive muscle weakness and brain damage. It is thought to affect just 16 children worldwide. |
| His parents had raised £1,267,080 as at Wednesday morning to fund the treatment, through a GoFundMe webpage that was still receiving donations. | His parents had raised £1,267,080 as at Wednesday morning to fund the treatment, through a GoFundMe webpage that was still receiving donations. |
| Francis stressed that funding was not an issue in the case. He said of the US therapy: “I dare say that medical science may benefit objectively from the experiment, but experimentation cannot be in Charlie’s best interests unless there is a prospect of benefit for him. | Francis stressed that funding was not an issue in the case. He said of the US therapy: “I dare say that medical science may benefit objectively from the experiment, but experimentation cannot be in Charlie’s best interests unless there is a prospect of benefit for him. |
| “Charlie’s parents have sadly but bravely acknowledged and accepted that the quality of life that Charlie has at present is not worth sustaining, for he can only breathe through a ventilator, and although they believe that he has a sleep/wake cycle and can recognise them and react to them when they are close, they realise that he cannot go on as he is lying in bed, unable to move, fed through a tube, breathing through a machine.” | “Charlie’s parents have sadly but bravely acknowledged and accepted that the quality of life that Charlie has at present is not worth sustaining, for he can only breathe through a ventilator, and although they believe that he has a sleep/wake cycle and can recognise them and react to them when they are close, they realise that he cannot go on as he is lying in bed, unable to move, fed through a tube, breathing through a machine.” |
| The parents had indicated previously that if they lost the case they might set up a charity for research into mitochondrial depletion syndrome with the money donated. | The parents had indicated previously that if they lost the case they might set up a charity for research into mitochondrial depletion syndrome with the money donated. |
| A spokesperson for GoFundMe said the crowd-funding platform would speak privately to the family about what they wanted to do. | A spokesperson for GoFundMe said the crowd-funding platform would speak privately to the family about what they wanted to do. |