Hospital V Human Heart: The Tragedy of Charlie Gard

While reading the detail of two parents and their fight for their child’s life, one will find themselves asking how far is too far in regards to the efforts taken to save the life of a loved one? Moreover, one will ask how much is too much in regards to a hospital’s control over the fate of their patient?

The story of Charlie Gard is no doubt a sad one, one that will raise deep and provocative questions for the residents of our world to consider. Eleven-month-old Charlie Gard is one of 16 people on record to be infected with the life-threatening disease mitochondrial DNA-depletion syndrome. Although Charlie was deemed to me in the “terminal stages” of his disease, his parents never stopped fighting for a way to cure their boy. When learning of an experimental treatment being offered in America, parents Chris Gard and Connie Yates started a “Go Fund Me” to raise awareness and gain support for their son’s plight. The account raised over ₤ 1 Million which was enough to cover for the air ambulance and

When learning of an experimental treatment being offered in America, parents Chris Gard and Connie Yates started a “Go Fund Me” to raise awareness and gain support for their son’s plight. The account raised over ₤ 1 Million which was enough to cover for the air ambulance and Charlie’s treatment. Yet despite their efforts, doctors at Great Ormond Street Hospital pleaded for Charlie to be taken off life support. Doctors claimed that the procedure would cause “undue suffering” to the child. They asked that his parents allow Charlie to “die with dignity”.

The initial battle in court was to allow Charlie to be transported for treatment. As is apparent in the course of the case, laws in the UK lean toward the word if the physician in cases such as these. But this did not halt the wave of support that came to aid in Chris and Connie’s fight. The hash tag #Charlies Army became trending not long after the trial. It got the attention of the world, gaining support from the President of the United States and even the Pope. Both world leaders offered hospital care for Charlie free of charge, given he can be transported. Yet the court ruled in the hospital’s favour, and the right to deny transport of Charlie was given to the hospitals.

Yet the battle did not end there. It seems that the doctors at Ormond Street would deny yet another of the parent’s request, one as heart-wrenching as the last. Their request was this: that Charlie is allowed to pass at home with his parents. Yes, this too was deemed by the hospital too but “undue stress” on the eleven-month baby. Furthermore the request for any form of hospice care, apart from what is currently being provided at Ormond, was also denied.

After appeals to the British Supreme Court, and the High Court the decision remained stagnant. The European Court of Human Rights refused to intervene in the trial. Though young Charlie was due to be removed from life support June 30th, Chris and Connie’s request to have more time with their son was approved. The world anxiously awaits the outcome of such an emotion provoking situation as the one Charlie Gard and his loving parents find themselves in. One can only wish peace on Chris and Connie, and hope for a sound resolution.