The parents of Charlotte Wyatt, a seriously handicapped baby from Portsmouth, have failed in their latest attempt to overturn a judgment that allows doctors to withhold life-saving treatment from their daughter.
In today's hearing, Darren and Debbie Wyatt argued that the condition of Charlotte, who has serious brain, lung and kidney damage, has improved dramatically since last October, when a High Court judge gave doctors permission not to resuscitate her if she stops breathing.
Last year, Mr Justice Hedley gave doctors at St Mary’s Hospital in Portsmouth the right not to resuscitate Charlotte, who is 22 months old, because her brain and other organs were so seriously damaged that she had "no feeling other than continuing pain".
An initial appeal by Charlotte's parents, who are Christians, was dismissed in April. Mr Justice Hedley, hearing the case again, ruled that it would be "pointless and possibly inhumane" to aggressively try and prolong the infant's life.
But today, David Wolfe, counsel for the Wyatts, told the Court of Appeal that Charlotte's health had enjoyed a remarkable improvement and that she can now smile and show "what may be enjoyment of things". She has gained weight, is being given pureed food, has grown and can now show "what may be enjoyment of things".
Times UK
3 comments:
Next step is retroactive abortion (abortion after birth). They are killing living people now, even when every one wants to keep that person alive, the parents of a child are not alowed to keep a child alive, may God have merry on the states.
Sorry I am just getting angry about our lack of respect for human life, it is to the point where some belive animal lives are more valable than human life, sad, sad, sad state.
"t is to the point where some belive animal lives are more valable than human life, sad, sad, sad state."
Ya Think?
Check this out:
http://randomandpic.blogspot.com/2005/08/plague-species-humans-in-zoo.html
This is how they view us!
Rob,
You have a much better medical understanding of all this but I must go back to the broader core debate of who gets to decide when a person has no reasonable chance for life?
Michael Schiavo was granted that right despite contrary medical opinions. The parents in this case were not granted such a right.
If we are going to value life, then we must define what life has value. It's a terrible burden for anyone.
The bigger concern here is the court removing the parental rights. Right or wrong that is what is taking place.
Post a Comment