|The family of Charlie Gard|
The Charlie Gard case in the UK has captured international attention regarding the best interest of an 11-month old child with terminal illness whose parents and medical providers in London can’t agree on the best course of treatment and care.
The apparently irreconcilable disagreements between the parents and his care providers have extended from weeks into months and, according to the English news source The Telegraph on Wednesday, July 19, the impasse may likely continue. Reportedly, Mr. Justice Francis, the High Court judge managing the case, confirmed that they are “due to hold further hearings later this month,” following the much-awaited American neurologist’s examination of Charlie that took place earlier this week.
Should Charlie’s parents be granted permission, allowing him to receive the experimental treatment they seek on his behalf, or is what they seek not in Charlie’s best interest due to the severity of his illness and the uncertainty surrounding the benefit of the experimental treatment?
These difficult and highly emotional cases are not without precedent. An historical perspective may be helpful in exploring the ethical dimensions of how best to proceed in situations like these.
What follows is a reflection by Myra Christopher on the Center for Practical Bioethics’ work in developing Healthcare Treatment Decision Making for Minors, including infants, that is now more than two decades old.
– – – – – – – – – – –
“Don’t forget about children” was Bill Bartholome’s response when I asked, shortly before his death in 1999, how we could honor him.
The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.