being cared for has been seeking to remove his life support, and will not allow his parents to transfer him to another facility. They state that the brain damage already done cannot be reversed and they consider any additional care to be futile. In other “futile care” cases, hospitals refusing to give additional care would at least allow parents or family members to transfer the patient to another facility or take them home to die. In this case, in spite of the fact that Charlie’s parents have somewhere else to bring him, and have raised funds for his care, the hospital is not allowing the parents to make that decision. (1) On 7/14 the judge agreed to wait until July 25 to allow a neurologist from the U.S. to examine Charlie and testify regarding his chances of recovery with the experimental treatment.(2) If the new treatment does not help Charlie, and he is in pain, his parents are open to letting him go, but not before they give him every chance.(3)
Babies in the U.S. have also been denied treatment by hospitals. In Seattle, the hospital actually reported the parents of Baby Ryan for child abuse because they had obtained an injunction against the removal of kidney dialysis. The doctors were wrong about death being imminent; Ryan lived 4 years as a happy child in spite of his poor health. In Michigan, when the parents of Baby Terry refused to consent to the removal of life support, their parental rights were taken from them. (4)
1.
http://www.lifenews.com/2017/07/10/charlie-gard-wins-victory-judge-denies-hospitals-request-to-deny-new-hearing/
2.
http://www.lifenews.com/2017/07/14/charlie-gard-safe-for-now-will-be-spared-until-july-25-so-neurologist-can-examine-him/
3.
http://www.lifenews.com/2017/07/10/why-do-people-think-its-ok-to-kill-charlie-gard-if-he-cant-be-cured/
4.
http://www.lifenews.com/2017/07/10/like-charlie-gard-these-children-have-had-their-right-to-life-denied-too/