PDA

View Full Version : Parental Rights - A Reality Check



Arthur Little
15th July 2017, 01:13
Thankfully, few couples find themselves facing the horrendous plight of baby Charlie Gard's parents.

Theirs is [literally] a "life or death" situation! :bigcry:

Here, then, is an update on the legal implications involved:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40600932 ... :ReadIt:

Longweekend
16th July 2017, 17:27
It really is a heartbreaking situation but what happens to the child when the parents are no longer able to look after him?

johncar54
22nd July 2017, 10:38
... but what happens to the child when the parents are no longer able to look after him?

In all cases a court can overrule parents.

I understand parents would want to keep their child alive as long as possible, as indeed anyone would want to do for a loved one, but there comes a time when the opinion of medically qualified people out-weighs the parents' irrational wishes.

johncar54
24th July 2017, 14:30
I see the parents have just withdrawn the application.

Now maybe the poor little boy will be allowed to pass away peacefully as the medical opinion has been for so long.

Longweekend
24th July 2017, 17:13
Yes at last, RIP Charlie x

Arthur Little
27th July 2017, 11:53
In all cases a court can overrule parents.

I still maintain the final choice - in such circumstances - should've been the prerogative of the parents ... NOT the lawcourts. :NoNo:

Steve.r
28th July 2017, 01:36
The child was brain dead, so they were deluded to think he could actually live a normal life anyway. Sure it's sad, but why let the child suffer longer than it has to.

Arthur Little
28th July 2017, 13:39
The child was brain dead, so they were deluded to think he could actually live a normal life anyway. Sure it's sad, but why let the child suffer longer than it has to.

.................... :iagree: ... although seems a bit like a "double-edged sword", whichever way one looks at it.

Courts being given the power to decide the fate of a little boy. Yet, on the other hand ... :anerikke: ... they are precluded from *sanctioning terminally~ill patients' "right to die with dignity", :icon_rolleyes: ... because *doing so would, of course, be deemed unlawful.

Tawi2
28th July 2017, 19:36
It's all irrelevant..............................He has passed away, R.I.P.

Steve.r
29th July 2017, 01:32
It's all irrelevant..............................
but not for the purpose of this thread.

I have not been in the parent's position so I cannot feel the emotion they felt. Bringing a child into this world is a wonderful thing for anyone....... but, I do tend to think (imo) that the parents of severely mentally disabled babies, knowing that the child has no future apart from living in a home or hospital for the entirety of it's life, with no chance of constructive consciousness, and then when the parents cannot cope, fobbing off to a 'respite' home, should immediately make the right decision for the child and services/community.

I dont want to upset upset anyone with my thoughts, but I used to be part of a group who would annually raise money for a respite home. When we all went there to make the presentation many of the children and adult patients would be wheeled out. Many of them had no awareness of any outside stimulus, both children and adults. The drain on authorities is massive for these places and they heavily rely on charities. Am I wrong to think that it is selfish for the parents to allow continuation of life if it is not viable. For the adult patients, whose parents were already too old to responsibly take care of their offspring, I think my thoughts are valid.

Michael Parnham
29th July 2017, 07:14
but not for the purpose of this thread.

I have not been in the parent's position so I cannot feel the emotion they felt. Bringing a child into this world is a wonderful thing for anyone....... but, I do tend to think (imo) that the parents of severely mentally disabled babies, knowing that the child has no future apart from living in a home or hospital for the entirety of it's life, with no chance of constructive consciousness, and then when the parents cannot cope, fobbing off to a 'respite' home, should immediately make the right decision for the child and services/community.

I dont want to upset upset anyone with my thoughts, but I used to be part of a group who would annually raise money for a respite home. When we all went there to make the presentation many of the children and adult patients would be wheeled out. Many of them had no awareness of any outside stimulus, both children and adults. The drain on authorities is massive for these places and they heavily rely on charities. Am I wrong to think that it is selfish for the parents to allow continuation of life if it is not viable. For the adult patients, whose parents were already too old to responsibly take care of their offspring, I think my thoughts are valid.

I'm sure you are right Steve even though it must be very difficult for those concerned to know what is best!