Don’t take away our last hope for Charlie
Sick baby’s parents in final desperate plea to court
THE parents of Charlie Gard yesterday asked the Court of Appeal not to ruin their last hope of keeping their desperately sick son alive.
The couple have been fighting for their nine-month-old to be allowed to go to America for treatment for his rare genetic condition.
But last month a judge ruled doctors should turn off his life support system.
The lawyer representing Chris Gard and Connie Yates told yesterday’s hearing in London the case raised ‘very serious legal issues’.
Mr Justice Francis had not given enough weight at the High Court hearing to Charlie’s right to life and liberty, said Richard Gordon QC.
He said the family wanted to ‘exhaust all possible options’, adding: ‘They don’t want to look back and think “What if?”
‘This court should not stand in the way of their only remaining hope.’
The proposed therapy in the US posed no ‘significant harm’ and judges ‘should not interfere with parental rights’.
Clutching a toy monkey belonging to his son, Mr Gard listened to representatives of Great Ormond Street Hospital in London saying Charlie could not see, hear or move and it was difficult for anyone to know whether he is in pain.
He was born on August 4 with a form of mitochondrial disease, which causes progressive muscle weakness and brain damage. The syndrome is so rare Charlie is only the 16th documented case worldwide.
Specialists at Great Ormond Street want to withdraw the ventilator helping Charlie breathe and allow him to ‘die with dignity’.
But Mr Gard, 32, and Miss Yates, 31, from Bedfont, west London, believe their son has been growing stronger and want him to have nucleoside therapy to treat his damaged DNA. The couple raised £1.3million for the trip that they believe could save his life.
More than 80,000 wellwishers donated to a GoFundMe page, including the socialite Tamara Ecclestone, who gave £10,000.
During the High Court hearing a Great Ormond Street specialist accused American medics of being more interested in cash than Charlie’s suffering.
Debra Powell QC, representing the London hospital, said a doctor had declared after Charlie’s last brain scan that he was in the terminal stages of his illness and the chances of survival were ‘vanishingly small’.
Katie Gollop QC, who led Great Ormond Street’s legal team, claimed at the Appeal Court that further treatment would leave Charlie in a minimal ‘condition of existence’. She said therapy proposed in the US was only experimental and would not help.
‘There is significant harm if what the parents want for Charlie comes into effect,’ she said. ‘The signifi- cant harm is a condition of existence which is offering the child no benefit. It is inhuman to permit that condition to continue.’
Miss Gollop said nobody knew whether Charlie was in pain.
‘Nobody knows because it is so very difficult because of the ravages of Charlie’s condition,’ she added. ‘He cannot see, he cannot hear, he cannot make a noise, he cannot move.’
Lord Justice McFarlane, Lady Justice King and Lord Justice Sales are expected to issue a ruling in the case tomorrow.