Send Charlie home to die in tranquility, parents beg
‘Baby’s final days of palliative care should take place at home’
CHARLIE Gard’s parents will be told today if they can take him out of hospital to spend his final few days at home.
The High Court will rule on whether Chris Gard and Connie Yates can have their “final wish” for their baby.
Mr Gard, 32, and Ms Yates, 31, asked Mr Justice Francis yesterday if they could have a “few days of tranquility” before his life-support is withdrawn.
But doctors at Great Ormond Street Hospital insisted that a carefully drafted plan should be put in place to make sure the terminally-ill youngster was granted a dignified end.
Today’s promised ruling follows an unexpected return to the courts yesterday after Monday’s bombshell decision to end Charlie’s life.
The parents ended a five-month legal battle by dropping their fight to take Charlie to the US for experimental treatment on his genetic illness.
Grant Armstrong, counsel for Charlie’s parents, told the court yesterday: “The parents’ last wish is to take Charlie home.
“They wish for a few days of tranquility outside of a hospital setting.”
He added: “The parents’ primary position is that Charlie’s final days of palliative care should take place at the family home.
“The parents had hoped that Great Ormond Street would work with them.
“We struggle with the difficulties which the hospital is placing in the way.”
In a written statement to the court, Katie Gollop QC, for Great Ormond Street, said Charlie’s best interests now had to be balanced against the needs of his parents.
She said: “The care plan must be safe, it must spare Charlie all pain and protect his dignity.
“At the same time, the plan must honour his parents’ wishes about two matters in particular, namely the time and place of his passing.
“Charlie’s parents want him to be with them and ventilated at home for several days before receiving palliative care.
“Above all Great Ormond Street wants to fulfil that last wish.”
She went on: “Charlie is a child who requires highly specialised treatment.
“His care cannot be simplified. It must be provided in a specialist setting by specialists.”
Ms Gollop said that among the practical problems is getting the ventilator, which allows Charlie to breath, through the front door of his parents’ home.
Mr Justice Francis said: “I will make my final decision tomorrow unless something completely new comes up.
“These are issues which cry out for settlement.
“It seems to me the parents should be entitled to choose how the next days are spent and where.
“What people don’t want is a long period of time. It surely must be in Charlie’s best interests that that time is shorter rather than longer.”
Yesterday’s news follows the heartbreaking decision to withdraw Charlie’s treatment.
The latest medical reports had suggested his energy-sapping mitochondrial disease would not improve.
Ms Yates told the High Court on Monday that giving up their fight to save Charlie was “the hardest thing that we will ever have to do”.
Fighting back tears, she said time had run out for her “sweet, gorgeous, innocent little boy”.
She said they had now decided to let him “die with dignity”.
She added: “We are struggling to find any comfort or peace with all this.
“But one thing that does give us the slightest bit of comfort is that we truly believe that Charlie may have been too special for this cruel world.
“We are now going to spend our last precious moments with our son Charlie.
“Unfortunately he won’t make his first birthday in just under two weeks’ time.”
The legal saga began when the parents wanted to take their son to the United States to have a trial drug proposed by Professor Michio Hirano.
Great Ormond Street claimed that the child had suffered irreversible brain damage and that the treatment could not help him.
Mr Justice ruled in favour of the hospital and his decision was backed by the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights.
The case was brought back to the High Court after Prof Hirano claimed to have new evidence which would have affected the original ruling.
Mr Gard and Ms Yates are expected to use their experiences to help other children facing similar medical issues.