Quote:
Originally Posted by DemolitionRed
I'm pulled two ways. One is, the love of a child conquers all but at what stage do you have to let go? The American specialist has shown deep reservations about treating a child who is in the terminal stage of this illness. The eighteen children who have been treated on this trial so far, had nowhere near reached the stage Charlie has (blind, deaf and little brain function). Its unchartered territory even for him. This American expert says Charlie would have to injure a lot of pain to go through this treatment and the only reason he'd be willing to go ahead is for compassionate reasons towards the parents.
Parental love has to be the strongest emotion any one of us will ever feel but sometimes, we have to let go. Connie and Chris have both said that they would listen to the advice of the American specialist and if he advised them not to go ahead (and it sounds like that's what he's doing) they would accept that. At the end of the day they just want what is best for Charlie.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Livia
It's such a sad situation... This little boy is terminally ill and the decision has been made in the interest of the child, not the parents. There is no evidence to suggest that treatment in the USA is going to make him better or improve his life, only that it could prolong it. He is never going to get any better he will only decline. I'm sure the decision wasn't taken lightly, being a drain on resources wouldn't be a legal reason to make this decision.
All that aside... Jesus Christ, what a terrible ordeal for his parents.
|
These post sum it up for me really, the Judge will have made the decision on the medical reports provided, thoughts are with the parents and their pain, but is there emotional involvement clouding their judgement, such a hard decision for anyone to make
11-04-2017, 07:50 PM
Hybrid Mode
