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at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/25/alfie-evans-struggling-after-treatment-withdrawn-court-told
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Version 0 | Version 1 |
---|---|
Alfie Evans: court rejects last-ditch appeal over treatment abroad | |
(about 3 hours later) | |
A court has rejected a last-ditch appeal by the parents of the seriously ill boy Alfie Evans against a ruling preventing them from flying him to Rome for treatment. | |
Three court of appeal judges on Wednesday backed the decision made at the high court the previous day to deny the request after Alfie was granted Italian citizenship. | |
The ruling followed a flurry of legal arguments by lawyers for Tom Evans and Kate James, the parents of the 23-month-old, who was said to be “struggling” on Wednesday after being taken off life support. | |
They included the claim that medical staff involved in the boy’s treatment could face criminal charges in Italy if he dies. | |
The parents, from Liverpool, were not at the court in London for the hearing. While arrangements had been made to allow Evans to listen via a phonelink, technical difficulties appear to have prevented him doing so. | |
However, among those present was the chief of staff of the Italian embassy, who was said to be ready to give immediate instructions to a “military grade” air ambulance that had been put on standby to bring the boy to Italy at the request of the Pope. | |
As the legal argument got under way on Wednesday, a man and woman believed to be from a German air ambulance crew were escorted from Alder Hey children’s hospital, where Alfie has been treated for the past 16 months. | |
The high court ruled on Tuesday that Alfie may be allowed home from Alder Hey, where his life support has been withdrawn following a long legal fight, but barred the parents from taking their son to the hospital in Vatican City. Mr Justice Hayden said that although Alfie had been a “fighter” since his life support had removed, his undiagnosed degenerative condition had “almost entirely wiped out” his brain matter and he stood no chance of recovery. | |
On Wednesday, the appeal judges heard that James was now represented by a different barrister, Jason Coppel QC, who said she had told him by telephone: “Alfie is struggling and needs immediate intervention.” | |
Coppel advanced arguments on grounds that ranged from drawing on legislation governing EU freedom of movement through to suggesting that the child’s new Italian citizenship was a change in circumstances that should be taken into account. | |
An “erroneous” decision in the UK could open up the doctors who had been involved in treating Evans to criminal proceedings in Italy, he added. | |
He also followed the lead of the barrister representing Alfie’s father in arguing that there had also been a change of circumstances in that the boy had been surpassing expectations of how he would cope after his breathing tube had been removed 48 hours earlier. | |
Paul Diamond QC, for Tom Evans, argued that there had been a “significant change of circumstances” because Alfie was still breathing after life support treatment had stopped. | |
He added that the parents were not seeking a “miracle cure” in Italy but wanted recognition that the context in which the palliative care that had previously been considered had now changed. | |
Emphasising the Catholic faith of Alfie’s parents, he said that there was no consensus about what constituted dignity, adding: “Where there is a lack of consensus the court should be mindful of that. Otherwise we are in a situation where the court is imposing values on people, which is improper.” | |
Alfie’s parents have already lost two rounds of fights – in the high court, court of appeal, supreme court and European court of human rights – and the barrister for Alder Hey told Wednesday’s hearing that a focus on repeated appeals made meant that the parents had been unable to engage in any discussion about withdrawal of care. | |
Rejecting the arguments put forward by the legal counsel for the parents, Michael Mylonas QC, said that the doctors had never said that the child’s death would be instantaneous after his ventilator had been removed. | |
Contrary to what counsel for the parents suggested, there was no new medical evidence, he added. “It has never been said to this family that Alfie would die immediately or before sundown.” | |
While it had been suggested that there was a change in circumstances that gave greater weight to allowing Alfie to be transported by air to Italy, Mylonas rejected this, telling the judges: “Alfie stands exactly the same risk of brain damage in transit.” | |
He said the “tragedy” for the parents was that Alfie looked like a normal child. Lord Justice McFarlane said the family had the “awful journey” from getting to know their baby, only for signs to appear two or three months later that “all was not well”. | |
The judges gave rulings on the appeals brought by the father first and then by Alfie’s mother, rejecting them on all grounds. | |
UK news | UK news |
Share on Facebook | Share on Facebook |
Share on Twitter | Share on Twitter |
Share via Email | Share via Email |
Share on LinkedIn | Share on LinkedIn |
Share on Pinterest | Share on Pinterest |
Share on Google+ | Share on Google+ |
Share on WhatsApp | Share on WhatsApp |
Share on Messenger | Share on Messenger |
Reuse this content | Reuse this content |