- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Euro Court of Human Rights: 10 month old baby to be taken off life support
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:22 pm
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:22 pm
Charlie Gard is ten months old child in the UK with a rare medical condition that is generally viewed as terminal. His parents wanted him to go to the U.S. for experimental treatment. The Courts? No. They then wanted him to be at home when he passes. No. They wanted him in hospice? No.
The doctors did decide to let the baby live a few more days so that parents can have some special time with the baby.
Story of Charlie Gard
The doctors did decide to let the baby live a few more days so that parents can have some special time with the baby.
quote:
British courts decided Charlie should be allowed to die after a heartbreaking legal battle in which doctors asserted that the child had no chance of survival, and Charlie's parents argued there was an experimental treatment in the United States they had not tried. The case was taken all the way to the European Court of Human Rights, which declined to hear the case Tuesday, upholding previous court rulings that it was in Charlie's best interest to withdraw life support.
quote:
Yates, Charlie's mother, said through tears Thursday that Aug. 4, 2016, was the best day of their lives because it was “the day that Charlie was born.” June 30, 2017, she added, would be the worst day of their lives. “We know what day our son is going to die, and we don't even get any say in what happens to him,” Charlie's father said.
Story of Charlie Gard
27
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:24 pm to chinhoyang
Such freedom in Europe. The US should model ourselves to follow their example
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:25 pm to chinhoyang
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:25 pm to chinhoyang
I was so excited and upbeat about the upcoming weekend and this story just smashed all that.
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:25 pm to chinhoyang
Frick whoever is letting this kid just die
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:26 pm to chinhoyang
There's discussion here at this link Charlie Gard
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:26 pm to chinhoyang
Can someone explain to me how a court can tell a parent their child has to die? I'm completely lost on this, maybe I'm retarded.
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:27 pm to chinhoyang
I would find every "person" on this Court of Human Rights and murder them painfully.
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:28 pm to chinhoyang
Damn, did she really take a selfie of them sleeping?
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:28 pm to LigerFan
quote:
Frick whoever is letting this kid just die
God?
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:29 pm to Ingeniero
Very sad, but the parents are probably in denial and delusional.
"Doctors have said he cannot see, hear, move, cry or swallow."
I'd like to know more about this experimental treatment. With a child in that condition, as heartbreaking as it is, it truly sounds like there's no hope.
"Doctors have said he cannot see, hear, move, cry or swallow."
I'd like to know more about this experimental treatment. With a child in that condition, as heartbreaking as it is, it truly sounds like there's no hope.
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:29 pm to LigerFan
quote:
Frick whoever is letting this kid just die
As much as it sucks, they are doing the right thing.
They can keep the child in as least pain as possible at the hospital.
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:30 pm to chinhoyang
This shows the freedom that we have in the U.S.
Eta:
However, their government made the best decision for all parties. It makes it easier on the parents. Here, a hospital would have bankrupted the couple before the kid died.
Eta:
However, their government made the best decision for all parties. It makes it easier on the parents. Here, a hospital would have bankrupted the couple before the kid died.
This post was edited on 6/30/17 at 12:32 pm
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:31 pm to TSLG
quote:
This shows the freedom that we have in the U.S.
Terry Schiavo
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:31 pm to magildachunks
And here's the truth...
But doctors at GOSH concluded that the experimental treatment, which is not designed to be curative, would not improve Charlie’s quality of life.
Not curative. They're just extending the inevitable.
Very sad but parents are irrationale (for understandable reasons) and can't see the forest through the trees. Reminds me of Schiavo case.
But doctors at GOSH concluded that the experimental treatment, which is not designed to be curative, would not improve Charlie’s quality of life.
Not curative. They're just extending the inevitable.
Very sad but parents are irrationale (for understandable reasons) and can't see the forest through the trees. Reminds me of Schiavo case.
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:31 pm to chinhoyang
Muh government run healthcare
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:31 pm to chinhoyang
Socialized medicine in action.
When you hand medical care over to the state, you hand decision making over to them too.
All actions have consequences.
When you hand medical care over to the state, you hand decision making over to them too.
All actions have consequences.
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:31 pm to Swagga
quote:
Can someone explain to me how a court can tell a parent their child has to die? I'm completely lost on this, maybe I'm retarded.
Me too. Why the frick can't the parents transport their kid wherever they want for whatever treatment they feel is best?
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:33 pm to ghost2most
quote:So, that is the government's decision to make?
Very sad but parents are irrationale (for understandable reasons) and can't see the forest through the trees. Reminds me of Schiavo case.
Even if private funds are being used?
Posted on 6/30/17 at 12:33 pm to LSUBoo
"There is significant harm if what the parents want for Charlie comes into effect," she told appeal judges. "The significant harm is a condition of existence which is offering the child no benefit."
She added: "It is inhuman to permit that condition to continue."
A banner hung on railings outside Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London
A banner hung on railings outside Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London CREDIT: PA
Ms Gollop said nobody knew whether Charlie was in pain.
"Nobody knows because it is so very difficult because of the ravages of Charlie's condition," she said.
"He cannot see, he cannot hear, he cannot make a noise, he cannot move."
Parents may be prolonging the child's suffering. Obviously, this is a tricky case.
She added: "It is inhuman to permit that condition to continue."
A banner hung on railings outside Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London
A banner hung on railings outside Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London CREDIT: PA
Ms Gollop said nobody knew whether Charlie was in pain.
"Nobody knows because it is so very difficult because of the ravages of Charlie's condition," she said.
"He cannot see, he cannot hear, he cannot make a noise, he cannot move."
Parents may be prolonging the child's suffering. Obviously, this is a tricky case.
Page 1 of 7
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News