The argument from the doctors was the baby couldn't even go home to die because of unnecessary pain it would cause the baby. If that's the case, then how would we expect the baby to survive an eight hour flight to the US?The government isn't "making" the decision, the doctors are. The Supreme Court backed them.
GMAFB They've already wasted how much money and tied up a hospital bed for nearly a year.
Because they know it's the right decision. It should have been made in October.
Yeah I figured you wouldn't care that a government was making the decision regardless of what people want. I mean you need the government to make all your decisions, so it makes sense.
I mean we all know doctors have never been wrong before...
It happens in the US fairly frequently. We had a elderly patient who had a child that wouldn't let the patient pass away, and the hospital was able to obtain medical power of attorney. The daughter had no say in her care. Not sure why these stories pop up every so often.
They had a doctor in the USA say that they would try a new treatment, the courts in Britain overruled saying they weren't allowed to try it even after raising all the money. That is effectively the government saying f$ck you to the parents.
Again, these arguments always turn into the "government" or the "doctors" are sticking it to whoever. I sort of doubt that one doc came up with this entire plan.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.thegua ... arlie-gard
Who knows, maybe more could happen.The specialist, who cannot be named for legal reasons, said therapy would provide a “small chance” of a meaningful improvement in Charlie’s brain function.
He told the court via a telephone link from America: “It may be a treatment, but not a cure. [Charlie] may be able to interact. To smile. To look at objects.”