European Court of "Human Rights" rules against parents of a terminally ill child

[Noradin]

There is the experimental treatment. Though it will not cure the child it is an option that is available.

The torture of a little child to make the parents and random people on the internet feel better about their morals is not an option.

[Deleted]

it's always good to see when the law is based on reasoning and not a theocratic or emotional argument.

I have my issues with the european legal system.. but in this instance it's a damn fine ruling.


Rip kid though... thats an impossible hand to have been dealt

[Noradin]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocratic_Oath

So you can link it when asked, but did you read and understand it?

[Templar 331]

The torture of a little child to make the parents and random people on the internet feel better about their morals is not an option.

What torture is being inflicted? Honest question. What in this whole situation is torturing the boy? He's blind, def, and on a ventilator. How are any of these torture?

- - - Updated - - -

So you can link it when asked, but did you read and understand it?

Mind adding a little substance to your retort?

[Noradin]

What torture is being inflicted? Honest question. What in this whole situation is torturing the boy? He's blind, def, and on a ventilator. How are any of these torture?

Mind adding a little substance to your retort?

Did you notice the part about "do no harm"?

The only thing that distinguishes that child from a bunch of random cells is that it looks human to others and that it is in constant pain.
Keeping it in that state is torture.

[Lex Icon]

life is not precious it just is.. there's no point in keeping the blood flowing in a corpse. it won't be aware of them no matter what/how long they try.
the damage is done. & a "possible treatment" does not = a cure.

[Templar 331]

Did you notice the part about "do no harm"?

The only thing that distinguishes that child from a bunch of random cells is that it looks human to others and that it is in constant pain.
Keeping it in that state is torture.

You are assuming he is in pain and not receiving anything for it. With as much criticism as I have for these doctors I'm pretty sure they are giving him pain killers if he is suffering in some way.

As for the "looks human", what separates this kid from you? What makes him not human?

[Noradin]

You are assuming he is in pain and not receiving anything for it. With as much criticism as I have for these doctors I'm pretty sure they are giving him pain killers if he is suffering in some way.

As for the "looks human", what separates this kid from you? What makes him not human?

I didn't say he wasn't human, learn to read.
And no, there aren't some magical painkillers that make everything better and give him the ability to think and be aware of the world.
At best they make him comatose,

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

You are assuming he is in pain and not receiving anything for it. With as much criticism as I have for these doctors I'm pretty sure they are giving him pain killers if he is suffering in some way.

To what end?

I'll just post this again with hopes someone will actually read it this time:

What is his condition?

Charlie’s condition is exceptionally rare. He suffers from an inherited mitochondrial disease called infantile onset encephalomyopathic mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome, referred to generally as “MDDS”. Charlie suffers specifically from the RRM2B mutation of MDDS.

Charlie’s brain, muscle and ability to breathe are all severely affected. In addition, Charlie has congenital deafness and a severe epilepsy disorder. Charlie's heart, liver and kidneys are also affected.

Charlie has severe progressive muscle weakness and cannot move his arms or legs or breathe unaided.

Charlie's eyelids cannot stay open and his eyes point in different directions because of muscular weakness. Charlie’s retina would struggle to develop and his brainwaves suggest that he is not going to be able to lay down normal visual patterns that should be learned at an early age. Eyesight is not something you’re born with, it develops over time.

Why is there no treatment available at GOSH?

There is no cure for Charlie’s condition which is terminal. GOSH explored various treatment options, including nucleoside therapy, the experimental treatment that one hospital in the US has agreed to offer now that the parents have the funds to cover the cost of such treatment. GOSH concluded that the experimental treatment, which is not designed to be curative, would not improve Charlie’s quality of life.

How did GOSH come to this decision about his treatment?

GOSH’s clinicians had to balance whether this experimental treatment was in his best interests or not.

One of the factors that influenced this decision was that Charlie’s brain was shown to be extensively damaged at a cellular level. The clinician in the US who is offering the treatment agrees that the experimental treatment will not reverse the brain damage that has already occurred.

The entire highly experienced UK team, all those who provided second opinions and the consultant instructed by the parents all agreed that further treatment would be futile – meaning it would be pointless or of no effective benefit

What can you tell us about Charlie’s care?

While we cannot discuss confidential information about Charlie’s care, any child who is as unwell as Charlie will receive round the clock care from a team of highly experienced and specialised nurses, doctors and other health professionals.

Care for children who are ventilated, as Charlie is, might include suctioning to take out extra fluid when a child is not able to cough for themselves, having their vital signs constantly monitored, regularly turning a child to try to prevent pressure sores if they are unable to move independently and trying to ensure a child’s skin is in optimal condition even though they are constantly connected to a ventilator.

In his High Court ruling, 11 April 2017, Mr Justice Francis said: “Charlie has been served by the most experienced and sophisticated team that our excellent hospitals can offer.”

In the Court of Appeal ruling, 25 May 2017, Lady Justice King said: “Charlie and his parents have the benefit of being treated at not only the centre of excellence that is Great Ormond Street Hospital, but of his having been under the care of a world-leading expert on mitochondrial disorders. I would wish to acknowledge the skill and care given to Charlie by the doctors and nurses at Great Ormond Street.”

[TEHPALLYTANK]

Higher brain functions. /Thread

If you think that is the definition of being human, you're absurdly ignorant and/or arrogant.

[Mehrunes]

The kid's only 11 month's old. His case was first heard in court in March when he was only 7 months old. How "long" is this process? And seeing as there's a possible treatment out there the "doctors, specialists and hospitals" haven't taken every possible step.

The "possible treatment" won't affect his life quality as per the doctors that are offering it. They're not offerring Jesus' blood and the parts of this child's brain that have already been deteriorated are not going to magically regrow.

Because people in power never make mistakes or need any oversight.....

Given how this case went all the way up to ECHR and all courts made the same decision, there was plenty of oversight.

Alright, let me be a little more specific then. I support "assisted suicide." I'm against euthanasia in this form. And while this isn't murder it is still wrong to kill a child while at least one option is available.

The only thing this option achieves is keeping him alive for a bit longer. If the only variable here is how long the child will live a totally awful life, then how is the "a bit longer" option the right one?

Like I said a few posts up, any doctor that says "let him die" isn't very good in my opinion. Hippocratic Oath and all that.

First, do no harm. Yeah, totally in contrast in their lack of desire to pointlessly prolong this kid's suffering.

Before you come in here with snide remarks I suggest you know what you are talking about.

The first part of the oath outright uses the word "first" for a reason.

since we can prolong his life indef. and skin graph and give therapy after, i think the pain of burning yet living will be outweighed by seeing his loved ones for another day or living life past that incident.

How do you perform a skin graft on someone who's burning? What is the point even, it's going to be burned anyway. And if you're literally on fire, you're not going to see squat (coincidentally, just like this child), because your eyeballs will melt.

it is very unclear if this condition is permanent and there is alot of speculation of % chance of recovery, just saying.

And yet not even the doctors offering the treatment in question are speculating about any chance of recovery.

[Queen of Hamsters]

This baby doesn't have that, This baby doesn't have any awareness to what's happening except what it feels, and from the sounds of it, it was pain and blackness. Wanting to cry for it's mother out of hunger but not physically being able to do it, all babies have the instinct to cry when hungry. It would be there and he wouldn't be able to do it. Being hungry then being fed not being able to swallow naturally, and as a result having a tub down your throat to send that hunger away. How do you even fathom what that is like from a baby's point of view? No language to understand, no way to communicate with natural functions, and not even being able to comprehend anything at all.

It sounds harsh, but they should make that babies passing as peaceful as possible and hope it happens sooner than later.

Anyone able to take these factors into account, yet continues to uphold the right of the parents to keep the child alive, shows just why the case was ruled against the parents.

I promise everyone 100% that if this had been a puppy with the same condition, people would be calling the parents cruel and horrific, selfish people for trying to keep it alive. Of course, then it wouldn't have been taken this far, for obvious reasons.

[TEHPALLYTANK]

Oooh. Is this the part where Im supposed to take the bait and debate a random stranger over a common sense view out of some misguided need to triumph in a battle of opinions?

Lol, pass.

Thank you for proving my point.