A sweet little baby boy is the focus of an enormous controversy dealing with the most basic of issues.
- The right to live or die.
- The right to have medical treatment that could cure or arrest a terrible genetic condition.
- The right of parents to have control over what is done for and to their child as opposed to the government making those decisions.
In a world inundated with news coverage about the right of women to abort their babies for whatever reason they deem important and in a world in which media coverage of abortion ignores the humanity of the “victim” but extols the rights of the killers, the plight of a tiny, British baby boy has captured the attention of many world leaders, some media and millions of people across the world.
What’s going on?
What’s going on is that there is an 11-month-old baby boy in London who’s been diagnosed with a terrible disease, and his name is almost bigger than he is: infantile-onset Encephalomyopathic Mitochrondrial DNA depletion syndrome. It’s a very rare genetic disorder – fewer than 20 in the world – and it’s considered terminal.
The problem is that the child, Charlie Gard, is still alive and is being maintained in that condition at London’s Great Ormond Street Hospital.
You look at pictures of Charlie, and, except for the tubes in his nose, he looks like any normal child. A beautiful child.
His parents say he is not in pain and, under the care he’s getting, he is being maintained. In other words, he lives.
Yes, but the people at the hospital say since they can’t cure him, that all treatment should stop and Charlie should be “allowed” to die. In other words, remove him from a ventilator and stop nourishment. Voila – Charlie will die.
Keep in mind that the British medical system is government-run, which essentially means that the government, hospitals and courts can make decisions that overrule parental rights.
In Charlie’s case, the hospital decided it had done all it could and told his parents that the child would be removed from life support. It was supported in that decision by the U.K. courts as well as the European Court of Human Rights. The ultimate decision – death was in Charlie’s “best interests.”
His parents, Connie Yates and Chris Gard, didn’t and don’t agree. They privately raised some $1.7 million so they could take Charlie to the United States where there is experimental treatment available.
Despite that, the hospital refused to release Charlie and even refused to allow his parents to take him home to die.
They must be afraid that, if they relinquish physical control over the baby, the parents will take him out of the country.
World reaction to this horrific dilemma was interesting. The Vatican offered to accept the child in the Vatican’s Children’s Hospital and treat him there. The British said no.
President Donald Trump offered to bring the child to this country so he can be treated. Simultaneously, New York Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Irving Medical Center said it would admit Charlie and evaluate his condition, using experimental treatments with FDA approval. There’s also an offer to send the drugs to London for evaluation there.
No decisions on any of this yet – but the first deadlines to withdraw life support have passed. Now the British hospital has requested new court evaluations, which are set for July 10 and 13.
So Charlie’s parents have a bit of breathing space. They told the Sun in London that they have hope from President Trump’s offer. Connie Yates said the baby was set to die on two dates, but then the White House got involved. “It does give us hope, because there was no hope left anymore.”
The attitude of many of those making the death decision was brutal. U.K genetics expert Lord Winston said the “interferences” by the Vatican and President Trump are “unhelpful and cruel,” especially for the parents.
Taking the easy way out by avoiding a decision, both Prime Minister Theresa May and Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson chose to let doctors make the decisions.
On the other hand, two U.S. Republican congressmen, Brad Wenstrup of Ohio and Trent Franks of Arizona, plan to introduce legislation this week to grant lawful permanent resident status to Charlie and his parents so the baby can get the treatment he needs in this country.
In their statement, they said, “When government is able to overrule a parent or guardian in determining a patient’s best interest, every vulnerable patient is put at risk.”
In Rome, Cardinal Carlo Cafarra blasted the British rulings against parental rights calling them “the pit of barbarity,” and he said it indicates we’re “at the end of the road of the culture of death.”
Caraffa is a former archbishop of Bologna, Italy, and founding president of the John Paul II Institute for the Studies on Marriage and the Family.
It remains to be seen what happens. American media have been very low key on coverage of the issue, most likely because they’re in favor of government control of health decisions. To them, it appears, the life of Charlie Gard is a bump in the road to government-approved abortion and euthanasia.
But Charlie is not a road bump. He is a living, breathing human being who deserves life, even though he needs help at this point to maintain it.
His parents brought him to life and have the intrinsic right to make the decisions concerning his care. When the government usurps that, we have crossed into Huxley’s “Brave New World.”
Unfortunately for the U.K. – this country isn’t quite ready for that.
And Charlie needs every chance to live.
Follow Barbara Simpson on Facebook.
Media wishing to interview Barbara Simpson, please contact [email protected].
|
