Should Charlie Gard be left to die?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by SpreadGoodNews1
No let him live and give him the treatment his parents want for him. Don't kill him. That is murder, quite simply. He may be suffering but that suffering can come to an end if the treatment works. And for those who say he will have brain damage even if the treatment works, well guess what? Having brain damage doesn't make your life less worthy of living. A brain damaged child can still live a good life and bring happiness to so many people. Same goes for children with Down syndrome, severe autism and everything else.
How is not giving someone permanent, expensive hospital treatment for the rest of their lives killing someone?
No, his suffering wouldn't come to an end if the treatment worked. He'd still be in constant pain.
How can someone who can't see, hear, feel or move live a good life? How naive are you?
Living is not the same as existing
Original post by cbreef
What scares me is the fact his parents still think there's a chance he can be a normal kid. They're so unbelievably deluded/in denial, it's sad to see.
It's understandable that they want to fight and can think logically, but I think what they're trying to do is very selfish. They seem more concerned with their feelings than for the child to be honest
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by FarhanHalim
No, it's so heartbreaking how this family has been treated. They do not want his life support to be switched. They don't want him to be killed. They want to seek experimental treatment in the US. They have the money to do it. And it has worked before. The success rate is 10% and that is a heck of a lot better than 0%. Let them seek treatment there. Don't kill Charlie when the parents want treatment for him. This is murder imo- killing a child against the will of their parents. Let him seek treatment. It's shocking that people actually think his life support should be switched off
Allowed to die and escape the pain is not the same as being "killed". He would be dead already but for medical intervention.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by SpreadGoodNews1
No let him live and give him the treatment his parents want for him. Don't kill him. That is murder, quite simply. He may be suffering but that suffering can come to an end if the treatment works. And for those who say he will have brain damage even if the treatment works, well guess what? Having brain damage doesn't make your life less worthy of living. A brain damaged child can still live a good life and bring happiness to so many people. Same goes for children with Down syndrome, severe autism and everything else.
So as long as even one else is happy then. But let's forget the pain he is in. He is not able to eat or drink for himself.
The treatment has not been used on humans only mice. The specialist from the USA have also said it will not work.
Original post by Trapz99
No, it's shocking how the hospital has been dealing with this. The parents want to seek the experimental treatment and they can afford it. A success rate of 10% is better than 0%, which is what it would be if he didn't get treatment. It's unfair to kill him against the will of the parents. Let them seek the treatment they want for their child. Don't kill him against their will. Charlie's fight will go on. Pray for them every step of the way.
Social services step in every day because parents aren't fit to make the right decisions all of the time. If the OP is correct, then he would still be in pain. His life would be prolonged but his quality of life godawful. The child is paramount here, NOT the parents
Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 6 years ago)
Deleted
If there is no chance of his survival, which from hearing the evidence seems to be the case, then keeping him alive is a massive waste of space and money. If there was even a slim 0.1% chance of survival, I would say go for it.
Original post by cbreef
What scares me is the fact his parents still think there's a chance he can be a normal kid. They're so unbelievably deluded/in denial, it's sad to see.
If it was your kid, you'd want to see him alive wouldn't you
I know I would, and I'd accept anything to keep him alive, if I were in their shoes!
Matter of opinion really though.
Original post by DanielCross
If there is no chance of his survival, which from hearing the evidence seems to be the case, then keeping him alive is a massive waste of space and money. If there was even a slim 0.1% chance of survival, I would say go for it.
If there was a 100% chance of survival with the experimental US procedure, there would still be no point in doing it if he would have to be on life-support indefinitely. The only logical (and merciful) action here it to let him go.
Original post by DanielCross
If there is no chance of his survival, which from hearing the evidence seems to be the case, then keeping him alive is a massive waste of space and money. If there was even a slim 0.1% chance of survival, I would say go for it.
Nevertheless, some people in the medical world are saying he could survive!
Original post by Nunchuck-master-2334
Nevertheless, some people in the medical world are saying he could survive!
Survive or thrive?
Original post by Nunchuck-master-2334
Nevertheless, some people in the medical world are saying he could survive!
Survive as a living vegetable in constant pain? We are kinder to animals
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Nunchuck-master-2334
If it was your kid, you'd want to see him alive wouldn't you
I know I would, and I'd accept anything to keep him alive, if I were in their shoes!
Matter of opinion really though.
I know I would, and I'd accept anything to keep him alive, if I were in their shoes!
Matter of opinion really though.
That's exactly why it shouldn't be their decision. Nobody expects the parents to be able to make a reasonable, measured judgement in such a horrible situation, but it's the state's duty to put the welfare of the child first.
trust me to put down some personal feeling comments that get picked on!
#saynototeasingandpersonalwars
#saynototeasingandpersonalwars
Original post by desaf1
No, let him have the treatment. Give him a chance. Don't kill him despite his parents wanting him to live.
careful, m8.
I said that and three people said I was being daft to suggest that!
Original post by Nunchuck-master-2334
careful, m8.
I said that and three people said I was being daft to suggest that!
I said that and three people said I was being daft to suggest that!
We're not the ones being daft. A child's life is worth everything. They need to give him the treatment he needs.
Original post by desaf1
We're not the ones being daft. A child's life is worth everything. They need to give him the treatment he needs.
exactly!
#menostupid
Original post by SpreadGoodNews1
No let him live and give him the treatment his parents want for him. Don't kill him. That is murder, quite simply. He may be suffering but that suffering can come to an end if the treatment works. And for those who say he will have brain damage even if the treatment works, well guess what? Having brain damage doesn't make your life less worthy of living. A brain damaged child can still live a good life and bring happiness to so many people. Same goes for children with Down syndrome, severe autism and everything else.
I would argue that not being able to see,hear,or breathe unaided would definitely make your life less worth living tbh.Its not murder because he should be dead already.The treatment will not cure his suffering.He has a genetic disease which has already destroyed his brain and muscles.If you stop the disease getting worse then it's too late.The damage has already been done.
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
