What's new

Charlie's day of destiny

A.A.Z

Tape Ball Regular
Joined
Jan 5, 2017
Runs
428
Post of the Week
2
Charlie Gard's petrified mother said today she hopes a High Court judge will grant them a 'miracle' and give him 'one last chance to live'.

Connie Yates says she and the little boy's father Chris Gard are in a 'living nightmare' as his fate will finally be decided after a hearing in the High Court in London at 2pm today.

If they lose Charlie's life support will be shut off - if they win Charlie could be flown to America or Rome for experimental treatment now backed by seven experts opposed to Great Ormond Street's plans to end his life.

She said: 'I don't know what we'd be like if we lost him. We have been very close to losing him on two occasions. I just hope we get another miracle and he gets that chance to live.

'We are living on a a knife edge but we are staying strong. We have hope to carry on', adding the support from Pope Francis and US President Donald Trump had 'saved his life so far'.

Charlie's parents Connie Yates and Chris Gard will today beg the court to be able to seek treatment for his rare genetic condition, which has left him on life support.

Great Ormond Street requested the hearing after seven top doctors suggested the new therapy might work and Mr Justice Francis, who previously ruled 'with the heaviest of hearts' that life support must be withdrawn, will hear the latest arguments.

Connie and Chris believe experimental medication from the US has a 10 per cent of working and they still believe he has the chance to be a 'normal boy' even though his London doctors claim he is irreversibly brain damaged.

Miss Yates told The Sun: 'We don't want him to be in the ground, we want him to be riding a bike. There's 18 children currently on this medication, they're all getting stronger, they're all getting better. It's a miracle what happens'.

She told BBC News today: 'I wouldn't be able to sit there and watch my son suffer and be in pain. He still gets enjoyment. We could take him to the park. He wakes up, he enjoys his tickles, he watches videos on the iPad.

'If he was suffering, I couldn’t do it, I promise'.

She added: 'I hope they can see there is more of a chance than previously thought and hope they trust us as parents and trust the other doctors'.

Ms Yates said that the case of Ashya King highlights where doctors can get it wrong.

She said: 'His parents took their son out of the country and were arrested. They ended up getting their son the treatment, and it worked. He is now at school and that treatment is now coming to the NHS. Sometimes parents are right'.

The interest of the Pope and US President Donald Trump in Charlie's case has 'saved his life so far', his mother has said.

Ms Yates told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: 'Yeah, they have saved his life so far.

'It turned it into an international issue. There are a lot of people that are outraged by what is going on. We have got new evidence now so I hope the judge changes his mind.'

She said that 'sometimes parents are right in what they think' and it is not simply that they do not want to switch off life support.

She said the family now have seven specialist doctors - two from the US, two from Italy, one from England and two from Spain - who are supporting them.

She added: 'We expect that structural damage is irreversible but I have yet to see something which tells me my son has irreversible structural brain damage.'

In a moving press conference yesterday his parents made a last plea for their baby to be given experimental treatment.

They were boosted by a 350,000-signature petition asking Great Ormond Street to stop insisting it would be kinder for Charlie to be allowed to die.

In another twist, the couple were joined by a controversial pastor who flew in from Washington to pray for them.

Rev Patrick Mahoney declared God has already played a part by making Donald Trump and Pope Francis speak out for the sick 11-month-old.

Charlie's parents yesterday accused Great Ormond Street and the courts of blocking their hope of taking him to America for therapy for his mitochondrial depletion syndrome.

Mr Gard, 32, said the hospital was 'fantastic' but added: 'Unfortunately, they are not specialists in Charlie's condition – the specialists are in America, where we want to go.'

He said there was no evidence of his son having catastrophic brain damage, despite doctors' claims. 'His brain is affected but this medicine can get into the brain and help that,' he said.

'He should have had this chance a long time ago. He deserves his chance at last. Let's get Charlie the treatment he needs.'

Miss Yates, 31, said the new evidence from seven scientists – whose letter last week persuaded Great Ormond Street to reopen the court case – meant Charlie now had a 10 per cent chance.

The seven specialists include the American doctor offering to treat Charlie, and a colleague, neither of whom can be named for legal reasons.

The seven specialists include the American doctor offering to treat Charlie, and a colleague, neither of whom can be named for legal reasons. Two others are from the papal children's hospital in Rome, two are from the Vall d'Hebron research institute in Barcelona, and the seventh is an award-winning clinical geneticist at Cambridge University.

'We feel that that's a chance worth taking,' she said. 'We've been fighting for his medication since November. Parents know their children best. He's our son, he's our flesh and blood.

'We feel that it should be our right as parents to decide to give him a chance at life, for a medication that's just oral medicine, with no known major side effects.'
Charlie's condition, which saps energy from his organs and muscles, means he cannot breathe without an artificial ventilator.

Great Ormond Street doctors say he is irreversibly brain damaged, deaf, blind, and quite possibly in pain.

They have told the High Court it was 'not a tolerable situation to leave a child in'. Mr Justice Francis agreed, and was backed by the Appeal Court, Supreme Court and European Court of Human Rights, which all ruled it would be kinder to let Charlie die.

His death has been 'scheduled' twice already, but both times the hospital postponed the removal of his breathing tube.

Miss Yates said: 'We wouldn't be able to sit there and watch him in pain, and suffering. We're not like that, we're not evil.

'We're not doing this for us. I absolutely believe this medication will work. I'm not a doctor but I feel like I am an expert in his condition now.'

Two American congressmen have announced they will table legislation in Washington to give Charlie and his family resident status to help them travel for treatment.

Yesterday the couple were supported in person by Rev Mahoney – a radical pastor repeatedly arrested for protesting against abortion in the United States.

He set up a $5,000 (£3,880) fundraising page online to travel to London and 'save Charlie's life'.

At the press conference outside Great Ormond Street, he gripped Mr Gard's arm and prayed for 'their precious, beautiful son who has captured the imagination of the world'.

He said: 'I cannot say how impressed I am by their heroism, and the fact that these two people have stood against the courts, bureaucrats, governments and hospital administration to fight for the life of their son. There is no greater power than the love of parents.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4679334/American-pastor-travelled-UK-pray-Charlie-Gard.html
 
All the medics who have actually treated Charlie say that keeping him alive and giving him more treatment will add to his suffering. The British high court, the Supreme Court and the European court of human rights having seen all the evidence agree with this.

Yet the parents still want to keep him alive and give him an experimental treatment which hasn't even been approved by the FDA.

Are they doing this for their own benefit or their child's?
 
I saw on the BBC news yesterday that this was going to be on the front pages of all the tabloids and I was wondering what the story was about. Then I read it in today's paper and am still trying to work out how it qualified as front page news.
 
Back
Top