Parents concede baby Charlie dying in hospice

Barsaba Taglieri
Luglio 27, 2017

If no plan is agreed, the judge had said the 11-month-old would be moved to a hospice and his life support withdrawn shortly afterward.

He announced his decision in a statement on Thursday.

Yates is asking to be allowed to choose the team that would care for Charlie.

The couple abandoned their legal fight on Monday after concluding that Charlie had deteriorated to the "point of no return".

His parents have since been trying to find an intensive care doctor to oversee a plan that would allow Charlie to be ventilated in a hospice for several days so that they could bid farewell to their son, whose birthday falls on August 4. Francis said Charlie's mother and father now accept that the only options for their son "are the hospital or the hospice". A ventilation tube keeps him alive.

The judge said it was a "very, very sad conclusion". Yates said amid sobs. She yelled: "I hope you are happy with yourselves".

The request made Wednesday indicated that the parents have backed away from their earlier expressed wish to take Charlie home for "a few days of tranquility" before his ventilator is disconnected and he is allowed to "slip away".

Charlie's parents ended their legal challenge to bring him to the United States because too much time has passed and the damage to Charlie's body is now irreversible.

The couple has now conceded that Charlie should be moved to a hospice but hope to assemble a team of specialist doctors so they can spend more time with him before his life-support is switched off.

The apparent cruelty with which United Kingdom high court judges have been handling Charlie Guard's case raises so many questions for those who believe in compassion. Nurses from the hospital nonetheless have volunteered to care for him in his final hours. The case has triggered a heated debate in the press and on social media about who should decide a child's fate, and has drawn comment from U.S. President Donald Trump and Pope Francis.

The case has become the catalyst for discussions on health care funding, medical intervention, the role of the state and the rights of the child.

Altre relazioni OverNewsmagazine

Discuti questo articolo