This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/13/charlie-gard-to-be-kept-on-life-support-while-european-judges-consider-case
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 1 | Version 2 |
|---|---|
| Charlie Gard to be kept on life support while European judges consider case | Charlie Gard to be kept on life support while European judges consider case |
| (about 1 month later) | |
| The European court of human rights has ordered the British government to continue to provide life-saving treatment to a 10-month-old baby suffering from a rare genetic disease. | The European court of human rights has ordered the British government to continue to provide life-saving treatment to a 10-month-old baby suffering from a rare genetic disease. |
| Chris Gard and Connie Yates, from Bedfont in west London, are seeking permission for their son, Charlie Gard, who has brain damage, to undergo experimental medical therapy in the US in the hope of prolonging his life. | Chris Gard and Connie Yates, from Bedfont in west London, are seeking permission for their son, Charlie Gard, who has brain damage, to undergo experimental medical therapy in the US in the hope of prolonging his life. |
| In a judicial update released on Tuesday, the Strasbourg court ordered the extension of “such treatment and nursing care as may be appropriate to ensure that he suffers the least distress and retains the greatest dignity consistent, insofar as possible, with maintaining life”. | In a judicial update released on Tuesday, the Strasbourg court ordered the extension of “such treatment and nursing care as may be appropriate to ensure that he suffers the least distress and retains the greatest dignity consistent, insofar as possible, with maintaining life”. |
| Last week Britain’s supreme court rejected the family’s appeal and in effect decided that he should be allowed to die with dignity. But through their lawyers, his parents filed a request to the ECHR for emergency legal intervention preserving his life and preventing “irreparable harm” until a final decision can be made by the judges. | Last week Britain’s supreme court rejected the family’s appeal and in effect decided that he should be allowed to die with dignity. But through their lawyers, his parents filed a request to the ECHR for emergency legal intervention preserving his life and preventing “irreparable harm” until a final decision can be made by the judges. |
| A chamber of seven judges in Strasbourg is awaiting a full application from the family’s lawyers, which they will examine. | A chamber of seven judges in Strasbourg is awaiting a full application from the family’s lawyers, which they will examine. |
| The ECHR said: “At this stage in the procedure, the court cannot prejudice any decision that it may ultimately make on the substance of the case. | The ECHR said: “At this stage in the procedure, the court cannot prejudice any decision that it may ultimately make on the substance of the case. |
| “Therefore, in the interests of the parties and the proper conduct of the proceedings before it, it has indicated to the [UK] government to prolong the application of the interim measure of 9 June 2017 until its decision on any substantive application that may be submitted. | “Therefore, in the interests of the parties and the proper conduct of the proceedings before it, it has indicated to the [UK] government to prolong the application of the interim measure of 9 June 2017 until its decision on any substantive application that may be submitted. |
| “In the event that no substantive application is submitted, the interim measure shall be maintained until midnight on Monday 19 June 2017.” | “In the event that no substantive application is submitted, the interim measure shall be maintained until midnight on Monday 19 June 2017.” |
| Specialists at Great Ormond Street hospital, where Charlie is being treated, say the nucleoside bypass therapy proposed by a doctor in the US is experimental and would not help. They believe the life support treatment should end. | Specialists at Great Ormond Street hospital, where Charlie is being treated, say the nucleoside bypass therapy proposed by a doctor in the US is experimental and would not help. They believe the life support treatment should end. |
| A high court judge in April ruled against a trip to the US and in favour of the Great Ormond Street doctors. Mr Justice Francis concluded that life-support treatment should end and that Charlie should be allowed to die with dignity. | A high court judge in April ruled against a trip to the US and in favour of the Great Ormond Street doctors. Mr Justice Francis concluded that life-support treatment should end and that Charlie should be allowed to die with dignity. |
| Three court of appeal judges upheld that ruling in May and three supreme court justices on Thursday dismissed the couple’s latest challenge after a hearing in London. Yates screamed when the supreme court justices announced their decision. | Three court of appeal judges upheld that ruling in May and three supreme court justices on Thursday dismissed the couple’s latest challenge after a hearing in London. Yates screamed when the supreme court justices announced their decision. |
| Gard and Yates, who are in their 30s, have launched a fundraising appeal to help pay for doctors’ bills in the US. It reached a £1.2m target before the high court trial. That figure has now topped £1.3m, consisting of more than 83,000 donations. | Gard and Yates, who are in their 30s, have launched a fundraising appeal to help pay for doctors’ bills in the US. It reached a £1.2m target before the high court trial. That figure has now topped £1.3m, consisting of more than 83,000 donations. |
| Their lawyer, Richard Gordon QC, told the supreme court: “The issue is whether the state has the power to intrude on decisions the parents have made in order to mandate that child’s death before it might come to an end. These are model parents trying to do all they possibly can for the benefit of their child. Their view on what is best for Charlie differs from the court.” | Their lawyer, Richard Gordon QC, told the supreme court: “The issue is whether the state has the power to intrude on decisions the parents have made in order to mandate that child’s death before it might come to an end. These are model parents trying to do all they possibly can for the benefit of their child. Their view on what is best for Charlie differs from the court.” |
| Gordon said that where parents are agreed, questions of upbringing “should not normally come before the court”. Parental responsibility, he added, was being eroded. | Gordon said that where parents are agreed, questions of upbringing “should not normally come before the court”. Parental responsibility, he added, was being eroded. |
| Ethics | Ethics |
| Children | Children |
| London | London |
| Health | Health |
| European court of human rights | European court of human rights |
| Human rights | Human rights |
| news | news |
| Share on Facebook | Share on Facebook |
| Share on Twitter | Share on Twitter |
| Share via Email | Share via Email |
| Share on LinkedIn | Share on LinkedIn |
| Share on Pinterest | Share on Pinterest |
| Share on Google+ | Share on Google+ |
| Share on WhatsApp | Share on WhatsApp |
| Share on Messenger | Share on Messenger |
| Reuse this content | Reuse this content |