Parents Against Injustice

When to end a terminally ill child's life? It's an agonising decision

https://www.theguardian.com/healthcare-network/2018/mar/22/when-end...

The DRs and Paediatricians at Alderhey Children's In Liverpool have stated that Baby Alfie Evans has no quality of life,

And has stated that it is in Alfie best interest to terminate his life support.and have taken the case to the Family Division of the High Court RCJ.

Judges have ruled in the favour of the Hospital so Alfie is doomed to die.

The Baby's Parents have tried to get permission to appeal, but their wishes were denied.

There only hope now is the ECHR, and the matter is now in the hands of the European Court.

The Parents have stated that Alfie responds to them, and YouTube videos have confirmed this,Alfie is seen opening his eyes, via stimuli , he manages to suck his soother, Alfie Father asks his Son to remove the soother from his mouth, which he then spits it out.

The baby has no diagnosis yet for this brain wasting disease..

There has been an outcry by the General Public, who have emailed the ECHR, asking that Alfie should be given the chance of life, being that the condition has not even been diagnosed and that there is evidence via YouTube video that Akfie is responding to his Parents, via stimuli , opens his eyes, when being stroked on the cheek,and is seen sucking on his soother.and spitting out his soother when being asked.

Many Children are being nursed and care for at home via a tracheostomy,and connected to a ventilator , with a package of care, i for one has worked as a carer looking after a young adult with muscular dystrophy .

A recent case highlighted how Drs and Paediatricians can be very wrong. Ashya King a small Boy with a very aggressive form of a brain tumour could be very well dead by now, if it had not been for his loving Parents who had heard of a treatment abroad where he could have proton therapy.

The Hospitals stance is that there could be nothing done for the boy, only end of life care.

The Parents SKIPPED TH COUNTRY TO SPAIN, AGAINST HOSPITAL DOCTORS WISHES, HE WAS TAKEN TO A HOSPITAL IN SPAIN, A WARRANT WAS PUT OF FOR THE PARENTS ARREST, they were placed in a prison in Spain.

They were eventually let free , and took their Son to Prague for the treatment, Ashya- is now living back in the UK, with his parents and siblings, there is no sign of the cancer, he is a healthy little boy that can now play football and ride his bicycle

.https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/children/11489212/Brain-tum...

Another recent case highlights the dilemma of Parents Baby Isaiah Haastrup was also diagnosed with a brain wasting disease, he was in Kings College Hospital in London,

The Hospital Trust decided it was in Isaiah best interest for his life support to be terminated, 3 Judges gave permission in the Family Division of the High Court for the life support to be terminated.

The parents took their case to the Supreme Court, their decision was that they would not overturn the decisions made by the High Court.there only hope was the ECHR, who also denied the Parents attempt for the other Courts decisions to be overruled.

Baby Isaiah died a few days later, after his ventilator was turned off.the child managed to breath unaided for 7 long hours after life support was terminated.

Could Isaiah survive if he had weaned off the ventilator very slowly,? the poor Parents will never know.

All these case including the Charlie Gard case involved Parents after to sort their legal teams, Probono, as in charlies case.

Parents involved in these tragic cases are denied legal aid, because they are Private Law civil cases.

But yet if the children had been taken into care by a Local Authority, full Public funded legal aid would of been granted.

http://home.bt.com/news/uk-news/isaiah-lived-for-seven-hours-after-...

THE JUDGE IN THE CHARLIE GARD CASE BEWILDERED BY THE LEGAL AID ISSUES REGARDING THESE KINDS OF TRAGIC CASES.

Secondly, I wish to thank all of the lawyers in this case who have assisted the court
but, in particular, the team who have worked for the parents because they have done it
not for financial reward but have given their services free. It is not for judges to make
political points and I do not now seek to do so. However, it does seem to me that
when Parliament changed the law in relation to legal aid and significantly restricted
the availability of legal aid, yet continued to make legal aid available in care cases
where the state is seeking orders against parents, it cannot have intended that parents
in the position that these parents have been in should have no access to legal advice or
representation.

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/gosh-v-gard...

http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed187940

Mum wins battle to keep terminally ill daughter out of foster care

http://metro.co.uk/2018/01/26/mum-wins-battle-to-keep-terminally-il...