Human Rights Court Rules Life Support Cut for Infant

G

Granule

Firebrand
Two parents will lose their beloved 10-month-old son to what could arguably deemed State execution — so avoidably vile, the imminent killing, Charles Dickens undoubtedly rolls in his grave.

Charlie Gard — ruled the (unironically named) European Court of Human Rights in determining the last appeal by his parents, Chris Gard and Connie Yates, “inadmissible” — will not be permitted transport to the United States to undergo experimental nucleoside bypass therapy to treat a rare disease, of which the infant’s is only the sixteenth recorded case.

Instead, medical staff at Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London will shut off Charlie’s life support — death with dignity, apparently, as doctors surmise the baby must be suffering horribly to be kept alive, while off ventilator, palliative care would be viable.

Gard and Yates were “utterly distraught” about today’s ruling — and for good reason.

Charlie will die.

https://www.infowars.com/human-righ...-infant-needlessly-signing-his-death-warrant/


That's one less earth violator to feed. Praise Allah!!!

-- The Left
 
Granule said:
Two parents will lose their beloved 10-month-old son to what could arguably deemed State execution — so avoidably vile, the imminent killing, Charles Dickens undoubtedly rolls in his grave.

Charlie Gard — ruled the (unironically named) European Court of Human Rights in determining the last appeal by his parents, Chris Gard and Connie Yates, “inadmissible” — will not be permitted transport to the United States to undergo experimental nucleoside bypass therapy to treat a rare disease, of which the infant’s is only the sixteenth recorded case.


Instead, medical staff at Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London will shut off Charlie’s life support — death with dignity, apparently, as doctors surmise the baby must be suffering horribly to be kept alive, while off ventilator, palliative care would be viable.

Gard and Yates were “utterly distraught” about today’s ruling — and for good reason.

Charlie will die.[/I]

https://www.infowars.com/human-righ...-infant-needlessly-signing-his-death-warrant/


That's one less earth violator to feed. Praise Allah!!!
-- The Left
Click to expand...


Great Ormond Street Hospital went to the courts with this question: Was it legal, and in Charlie's best interest, for the hospital to remove the child from life support — even against his parents' wishes?

In a ruling in April, Justice Nicholas Francis of the Family Division of the High Court of Justice wrote that there was “unanimity among the experts from whom I have heard that nucleoside therapy cannot reverse structural brain damage.”

“Transporting Charlie to the USA would be problematic, but possible,” he added. “Subjecting him to nucleoside therapy is unknown territory — it has never even been tested on mouse models — but it may, or may not, subject the patient to pain, possibly even to mutations. But if Charlie’s damaged brain function cannot be improved, as all seem to agree, then how can he be any better off than he is now, which is in a condition that his parents believe should not be sustained?”

Francis wrote it was “with the heaviest of hearts but with complete conviction for Charlie’s best interests” that he decided the hospital could withdraw treatment, except for palliative care, to let Charlie “die with dignity.”

An appeals court, then a supreme court, upheld it, according to the National Review.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ill-be-allowed-to-die/?utm_term=.0ed6cca38f1b


Useful Idiot dutifully recatapults the propaganda while Alex Jones laughs all the way to the bank....
 
blackvegetable said:
Great Ormond Street Hospital went to the courts with this question: Was it legal, and in Charlie's best interest, for the hospital to remove the child from life support — even against his parents' wishes?

In a ruling in April, Justice Nicholas Francis of the Family Division of the High Court of Justice wrote that there was “unanimity among the experts from whom I have heard that nucleoside therapy cannot reverse structural brain damage.”

“Transporting Charlie to the USA would be problematic, but possible,” he added. “Subjecting him to nucleoside therapy is unknown territory — it has never even been tested on mouse models — but it may, or may not, subject the patient to pain, possibly even to mutations. But if Charlie’s damaged brain function cannot be improved, as all seem to agree, then how can he be any better off than he is now, which is in a condition that his parents believe should not be sustained?”

Francis wrote it was “with the heaviest of hearts but with complete conviction for Charlie’s best interests” that he decided the hospital could withdraw treatment, except for palliative care, to let Charlie “die with dignity.”

An appeals court, then a supreme court, upheld it, according to the National Review.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ill-be-allowed-to-die/?utm_term=.0ed6cca38f1b


Useful Idiot dutifully recatapults the propaganda while Alex Jones laughs all the way to the bank....
Click to expand...
Parroting panty waste agrees with the murderers and Washington Compost. What else is new?
 
interesting. Liberals generally fight for euthanasia. The right for one to end ones life with his consent due to pain or other things.

In this case, legally, the parents have the right to decide what happens to the baby. The hospital disagrees and the courts side with them declaring they have the right.

Im stunned no one is talking about the legal precedent this creates.

Obviously other babies could have the same fate when it is no longer profitable for the hospital to treat them but this extends to other scenarios too. If a husband is near death the spouse usually gets to decide. Using this precedent hospitals now can. Older people usually assign a power of attorney in case of situations like this. Hospitals can now overrule them using this precedent.
 
So now the libtards are against experimental therapies?

Looks like these liberals would have looked at a room of huge servers in 1960 and said there will never be personal computers

Also, why not stem cells? Didn't they cure Michael J Fox and make Christopher Reeve walk? A few aborted stem cells and this kid will be right as rain

Of course the Deshtards of the world miss the point. This is about the parents right to try to save their kids life WITHOUT gobblement money. It is their decision. Not the gobblements. But, this is what you get with socialized medicine.

People like Deshtard and Tom think it is cute until the time will come when the gobblement wants to pull their plug. Those days can't come soon enough for me
 
Granule said:
Nope. We were just hoping the kid could escape the clutches of abortion loving degenerates and have a shot at a normal life.
Click to expand...
He'd have his work cut out - he was as brain-dead as you, but he didn't write ludicrous nonsense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top