Jaina Solo

One of the most agonising dilemmas ever to come before a judge - whether a baby should live or die - was outlined starkly and emotively in the high court yesterday. Two parents seeking to do their utmost for their desperately ill daughter faced a procession of doctors insisting that the kindest thing they could do for her would be to let her slip away naturally.
Mr Justice Headley, the judge who must take the decision, was told that it would be "futile, or even cruel" to put 11-month-old Charlotte Wyatt on a ventilator if she starts fighting for breath.

Dr C, a consultant paediatric neurologist called as an expert witness by Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, told the judge that ventilation might have to be through a tracheostomy, inserting a breathing tube through the windpipe.

The doctors caring for Charlotte at the trust insist it would be in her best interests to let her die. But her parents, Darren and Debbie, both devout Christians, want her to be put on a ventilator if, as she inevitably will, she develops breathing problems again.

Yesterday, across a courtroom at the Royal Courts of Justice, they heard the doctors say that subjecting her to any more aggressive intervention would be, in one consultant's words, "purposeless and therefore intolerable to her".

Read the rest of the story here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/st...317262,00.html

What do you guys think? It sounds to me as if it would be cruel and futile to give the baby any further intensive care. When her condition inevitably worsens they should let nature take its course as she has basically no chance of survival, and even if she lived could never leave the hospital.

alli balli

People need to learn that sometimes respecting life means letting it end.

mh67511

I think it should be up to the parents, it's their child. That's like forcing them to sign a DNR.

alli balli

You can say that it's up to the parents what to do with their child, but would you say that if they had neglected her, or tortured her? Because according to the doctors in the article, they are basically torturing her. It's just in a less obvious way. The well-being of the baby should come first, and not the well-being of her fanatical parents.

Did you read the entire article? It's absolutely horrific what they're making her go through, and it's all for nothing - they said that she won't live past infancy, and if she somehow did she would be alive only on the most basic of levels due to severe neurological damage.

mh67511

I've heard many stories where the doctors said patiends would not survive and they did indeed survive. I believe that miracles can happen and I believe in the power of prayer.

alli balli

Yeah, a senior at my high school died last year because her parents believed that too.

Jaina Solo

By that logic NO one should be removed from life support, EVER. Even if it is not the parents' intent to be cruel I believe to keep resuscitating this baby is abusive. She is very ill. She has very little brain function (but enough that she can suffer), is nearly blind, is deaf, has serious organ damage including severly scarred lungs, is very unresponsive, and is in a lot of pain. The doctors have done everything they can for her for nearly a year but there is nothing left to do. The decision needs to be what is in the best interest of the child, not the parents. Sometimes that means allowing nature to take its course when medicine can do no more. The decision in this case will be announced on Thursday BTW. (I don't remember if that was mentioned in the article or not)

mh67511

I never said I would keep her on life support or they should. All I said is that it is their decision and that I believe in the power of prayer and that miracles CAN happen, doesn't mean they will.

Imagine if you had a baby and had to face the choice of letting it die. You can't act as if this is just some easy, simple choice to make, it's probably incredible hard! Maybe they just can't bring themsevles to accept the fact that there is nothing else humanly that can be done to save her. They are probably in denial.

Just to clear it up, I personally would NOT put the child on breathing tubes or resucitate them. My parents either, if they are ever in the situation. In fact my mom told me once she does not want to be kept alive by machines. She would just rather die naturally then try and extend her life by a few hours/days/whatever.

Jaina Solo

It's not an easy choice, but I highly doubt I could watch my baby suffer and be in pain knowing it was for nothing. And it is not neccesarily their decision, if what they are doing is causing more pain/harm to the baby the court has the right by law to overrule them in the child's best interests.

pacifierrocks

yeah i agree. the parents should think about the child and since she is suffering its just better to let her go. there's no point in just dragging it out and if they want to rely on the mircles or whatever then do it until she dies, but don't prolong her suffering.

Jaina Solo

The High Court has ruled that further treatment is not in the baby's best interests due to her poor quality of life. If she stops breathing again, she will be allowed to pass away.

Article here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3723656.stm