Yesterday little Charlie Gard’s parents made the incredibly difficult decision to not pursue medical treatment in the United States. The wrenching story of this stalwart family has captured the hearts of people all across the world.
For those unfamiliar with the details of this case, Charlie Gard is an eleven month old boy from the UK that suffers from a rare mitochondrial disease. For the past five months, Charlie has been at the center of an ongoing legal battle between his parents, Connie Yates and Chris Gard, and the medical staff of the Great Ormond Street Hospital. His parents have raised over $1.5 million to transfer him to the United States where specialists agreed to undergo an experimental treatment in hopes of saving his life. Tragically, for months the European court system stood in the way of Charlie’s parents securing this treatment for their son, despite acknowledging the exceptionally loving care they had shown him.
From the Pope to President Trump, millions have weighed in on the question that has underpinned this global debate: Does the opinion of government doctors supersede the authority of parents?
The Gard case has many nuances that make it different from other right to life cases. Still, a central issue runs through all of them: who has the right to make decisions on behalf of children? Where do parental rights begin and where do they end? Who decides the boundary lines of these rights? The government? Medical staff? Society at large?
If the will of Charlie’s parents had been considered five months ago — when they indicated they wanted Charlie to begin experimental treatment — we most likely would not be having this conversation today. Maybe Charlie would have thrived under the experimental treatment. Or maybe the treatment would have been ineffective. The injustice is that we will never know. And more importantly, neither will Charlie or his parents.
As Wesley Smith of the National Review writes, “UK law…gives ultimate decisional power in this kind of disputes to doctors. That is an unfortunate consequence of a centrally controlled healthcare system.” A system that based their determination regarding Charlie’s life on a value judgement – not a medical decision.
Short of a miracle – it looks like this precious little boy’s story might be coming to a close. We must let the questions that define this heart wrenching tragedy inform the way we approach healthcare in the United States.
Are we willing to entrust to the government — both state and federal — the power to make some of life’s most personal choices on our behalf? Do we want millions of Americans to be forced to rely upon a form of socialized medicine where bureaucrats determine what constitutes as “quality of life?”
Although we have few answers or words of comfort to offer Charlie Gard’s parents, we must be brave enough to ask ourselves the hard questions. What are we, as a nation, willing to tolerate when it comes to government interference in the lives of our loved ones? When is enough finally enough?
Such a sad story. Praying for the Gard family.
Sad that NCCivitas would use this type of scare tactic. An extremely narrow and shallow method of arguing for or against important practical and ideological issues.
George, I appreciate you taking the time to comment. What precisely is it that you find to be a scare tactic? My citation of the hellish reality that Charlie Gard’s parents are living in? What narrow and shallow methods are being employed? The blog post’s spotlight on the importance of understanding the nature of parental rights? If you truly desire to engage in constructive dialogue, please know that I’d be more than happy to do so.
I agree, Marie. Thank you for taking the time to read and comment.
George means he wants you to stop exposing how cruel and evil and hateful and murderous he and all his fellow leftists are.
Really Pinto? Leftists? Cruel, murderous and hateful?
You are as ignorant as all the whack jobs who claimed Democrats are violent when Steve Scalise was shot; NEVER even once noting the hate, violent words, and disgusting threats made against Barack Obama for 8+ years by mainstream Republicans and celebrities like Ted Nugent (who btw was at dinner with Trump at the White House this year).
Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) has introduced a Bill recently where he states that the 3 branches of Government are crucial to America. One of those branches is Judicial (The Courts).
The Court in Europe ruled. Similar to the Court in Florida ruled in the Teri Schiavo case. In both cases, the Rule of Law prevailed.
George is correct. Now call me ‘lefty’ if it makes you feel good. It makes you ignorant as well.
No, Scott, the Rule of Law did not prevail in those blatant miscarriages of justice. You and George and everyone else cheering on those despotic totalitarian usurper judges who twisted the law to murder Charlie Gard and Teri Schiavo with their fraudulent rulings are all cruel, evil, hateful, and murderous just as I said. You lawless goose-stepping fools with your smug sophistry will all be retried in the afterlife, convicted of all your endless capital crimes against God and Man, and sentenced to burn endlessly in the Lake of Fire for them.
Dear Pinto,
Please do tell us specifically what Laws were broken in both the Gard and Schiavo cases. And please cite the Court rulings on each case that you detest.
Scott: it’s called murder in the first degree, and Michael Schiavo and Judge Greer and all you leftists are guilty of it:
Terri Was Murdered.
As for Charlie Gard, his murder was a violation of the Nuremburg Laws, for which we executed Nazis and likewise ought execute those judges and doctors who abrogated the parents’ rights and the child’s right to live:
Charlie Gard’s Death Sets a Dangerous Precedent.
Like Ramsey Clark, who defended the genocidal Nazis on the basis that they were merely following their country’s “racial purity” laws, you fraudulently claim the Rule of Law is on your side, but you goose-stepping leftists are just as guilty as they of violating all of the Highest Law’s most fundamental tenets, and will accordingly be convicted in that Higher Court of all your atrocities and crimes against humanity and sentenced to the Second Death.
Allowing a person to die naturally is called natural death, not murder. Keeping someone alive who is brain dead solely on life support is cruel. Defending that notion for your own grandiose religious-political viewpoint is heresy.
Preventing a child from receiving experimental treatments that might have saved his life while pretending he was “brain dead” when his not is called murder, not natural death. Forbidding his parents to pursue these treatments is cruel. Defending these murderers with your sophistry about the Rule of Law the same way Ramsey Clark defended his clients is the real heresy, for which you leftists are all justly condemned of being accomplices to murder.
That line should read “when he is not” up there.
The Nazi’s were ‘Right Wing Fascists’ Pinto. Similar to you and the folks at NC Civitas. They professed idea’s like YOU DO…banning and murdering liberals, jews, homosexuals, immigrants. They were White Aryan Supremacists like Donald J. Trump.
Why you are using the Nazi’s in a conversation about Gard and Schiavo is of itself stupefying.
And where is your response to Teri Schiavo? You know, the case where the Court considered her Husband’s expression of her wishes and BIG GOVERNMENT Republicans tried to step in and stop the Liberty of Teri Schiavo?
Harvard study says 45,000 deaths occur each year because they lack Health Insurance. So what does the Republican Congress do? They punt the ball after their own Congress says they will kill more folks with their heartless Plan.
http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2009/09/new-study-finds-45000-deaths-annually-linked-to-lack-of-health-coverage/
But ‘liberals’ are murderers according to Pinto.
Where do you concoct your devious ideas? I know Fox News incubates and promotes many of them for you.
Religious Fascism is all you have to offer Pinto.
Mindless left-wing dogma, projection, and hypocrisy are all you have for yourself, Scott; you’ve never had anything to offer us.
Here you go Pinto…the article you reference from the Village Voice does not describe how Teri Schiavo died. How do I know? My Mother died by personal choice of removing herself from Feeding Tubes.
Yes, the death by Hydration was as described. What they left out was the Doctors and Hospice CARE that accompanied it. The pain was managed and alleviated.
Since you are familiar with the Village Voice, search for Wayne Barrett and his 40 years of covering Donald Trump’s corruption, crimes, bullying. and stiffing workers / contractors for the Village Voice.
And I am sorry to inform you, but you have not even come close to the Legal Judicial decisions of either Gard or Schiavo (what were they, why were they wrong. where did they stray from the rule of law)?
Repeating your lies isn’t an answer, you goose-stepping murderous leftard fascist. You lose.