Calgary Herald

Charlie Gard’s parents to present new evidence on untested therapy

Judge refuses to recuse self from emotional case

- ROBERT MENDICK

• A High Court judge in Britain has given Charlie Gard’s parents less than 48 hours to prove an experiment­al treatment works, while taking a swipe at Donald Trump for interferin­g in the case.

The baby’s parents, Chris Gard and Connie Yates, grew more and more distressed and upset during the hearing Monday, interrupti­ng lawyers to accuse Great Ormond Street Hospital, which is treating him, of lying.

In one impassione­d plea, Yates, 31, said: “He is our son. Please listen to us.”

Gard, 32, said in an another interrupti­on of Great Ormond Street’s lawyer: “When are you going to start telling the truth? They are lying to you.”

At the end of the hearing, Gard walked out and punched the wall in frustratio­n.

Justice Nicholas Francis ordered Charlie’s parents to provide new evidence that would show an untested therapy would be effective. The High Court judge gave the couple until 2 p.m. on Wednesday to produce the material ahead of a further hearing on Thursday morning to decide the 11-month-old’s fate.

In a seeming swipe at the U.S. president, who posted on Twitter a week ago: “If we can help little #CharlieGar­d ... we would be delighted to do so,” Francis told the court: “I have to decide this case not on the basis of tweets, but on the basis of clear evidence.”

He added: “I understand parents will grasp at any possibilit­y of hope.”

The case has become a cause celebre, with the Pope also offering support, while a worldwide campaign ‘#I am Charlie Gard’ was launched on Facebook and Twitter by a group of evangelica­l U.S. Christians who flew to Britain to take up the campaign.

Gard and Yates, from Bedfont, in west London, want to send their son to the U.S. or Italy for treatment of his rare genetic condition, claiming new research shows he could improve by at least “10 per cent.”

Their lawyers requested a new court case in two weeks’ time but the judge said it would be wrong to wait that long. He read out a statement from a Great Ormond Street member of staff who said that doctors and nurses were under “extreme strain” with the case dragging on.

Francis said: “Staff feel it is desperatel­y unfair to Charlie... week after week knowing that every step they take for Charlie is against his welfare.”

He ruled in April that Charlie’s life support should be withdrawn and that he be allowed to “die in dignity” while blocking any attempt to take him overseas.

Lawyers for Charlie’s parents called for the judge to remove himself from the case on the grounds he had already made his mind up. But the judge insisted he remained the best person to decide if the new claims of successful experiment­al therapy amounted to fresh evidence.

The judge said: “You are going to have to persuade me that something new or dramatic has changed.”

Great Ormond Street Hospital disputed claims made by Charlie’s parents that there was new evidence. The hospital’s lawyer, Katie Gollop, said it had been forced to come back to the High Court for this latest hearing after Yates and Gard’s legal team threatened a judicial review.

“Some of this new evidence that was said to be new is not new,” said Gollop.

The hospital insists Charlie’s body is growing but that his brain is not, proof they claim that the little boy’s condition is deteriorat­ing and that he has suffered irreversib­le brain damage.

The judge suggested the circumfere­nce of Charlie’s head be measured to see whether it had grown since the original court hearing in April.

Seven scientists, who cannot be identified due a court order, had submitted a letter in support of the couple, saying the treatment could help. The scientists said that “ideally” it should be tested on mice first but there wasn’t time for such a trial in Charlie’s case.

Charlie suffers from mitochondr­ial depletion syndrome, which saps energy from his organs and muscles. His parents believe experiment­al nucleoside treatment will improve the quality of his life. He cannot breathe without the aid of a ventilator and is being administer­ed morphine to ease any possible pain he is suffering.

The couple’s lawyer, Grant Armstrong, told the court: “If the court is minded to reconsider its judgment he will go for treatment in Rome or the U.S. and if the court does not review its decision then ... very quickly he will die.”

Charlie’s parents have already taken the case to the Court of Appeal, Supreme Court and the European court in Strasbourg but have lost at each turn.

Thursday’s hearing is likely to be their last chance, although the judge could order a further, fuller trial if he believes the new claims do amount to fresh evidence the treatment will work.

In a statement following Monday’s hearing, Yates and Gard spoke of their hope. A spokesman for the couple said: “Charlie’s parents look forward to the new evidence being heard before the High Court on Thursday that will result in Charlie’s parents taking him to the U.S. or Italy for groundbrea­king treatment. Mum and dad say: If Charlie is still fighting, then they are still fighting.”

 ?? WENN.COM ?? Connie Yates and Chris Gard outside a London court Monday after their latest battle for their son Charlie Gard. Gard and Yates want to send their son to the U.S. or Italy for treatment for his rare genetic condition, claiming new research shows he...
WENN.COM Connie Yates and Chris Gard outside a London court Monday after their latest battle for their son Charlie Gard. Gard and Yates want to send their son to the U.S. or Italy for treatment for his rare genetic condition, claiming new research shows he...
 ?? FAMILY OF CHARLIE GARD VIA AP ?? An undated photo of Charlie Gard. A British judge hearing the case ruled in April that Charlie’s life support should be withdrawn, while blocking any attempt to take him overseas.
FAMILY OF CHARLIE GARD VIA AP An undated photo of Charlie Gard. A British judge hearing the case ruled in April that Charlie’s life support should be withdrawn, while blocking any attempt to take him overseas.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada