Parents fight over baby's right to live

DaemonSeid · #1 11-02-2009, 12:24 PM

London, England (CNN) -- A baby born with a severe birth defect put its parents on opposing sides in a British court Monday over whether to switch off the child's life support.

The mother sides with doctors and favors disconnecting the baby's respirator. The father took the case to the High Court in London to stop them.

They say the child's lungs fill with fluid every few hours -- giving him the sensation he is choking -- and that doctors must then use suction to remove the fluid, also causing the child to suffer.

The father took the case to court to stop them.

He says the baby can play and recognize its parents. His lawyers plan to show videos of the baby in court to demonstrate he responds to the world around himself.

The baby's parents are amicably separated, the father's lawyer said.

No one involved in the case can be named due to a court order protecting their privacy.

The baby, known as RB, is about one year old and suffers from congenital myasthenic syndrome, a rare genetic condition which means he cannot breathe on his own.

"It causes severe muscle weakness, feeding and respiratory problems, and the disease is progressive," the hospital said in a statement.

The hospital, which is part of Britain's National Health Service, says it is doing what is best for the child.

"Baby RB's case is a deeply tragic one," the hospital said in a statement. "We understand how difficult this legal process must be for both parents and RB's extended family and friends. However, all those involved in the care of RB are taking these steps because they consider it is in RB's best interests."

link

What say you, GC?

AOII Angel · #2 11-02-2009, 12:34 PM

What a horrible decision for both parents to have to make.

nikki1920 · #3 11-02-2009, 12:39 PM

wow.

That's a choice I wouldn't want to make.

agzg · #4 11-02-2009, 01:07 PM

Poor baby RB, and poor parents. That's a very tough choice to make.

DaemonSeid · #5 11-02-2009, 01:35 PM

But...the ultimate question is, kill him now or let the disease kill him.

Also in the article it does mention that they aren't sure which strain of this disease (congenital myasthenic syndrome,) the baby has and dependant on which, it can be treated.

I think my question is, has all options been exhausted and is it a matter of financial involvement that may be hindering his treatment?

JBaby1981 · #6 11-02-2009, 01:50 PM

This must be a horrible thing for the parents to go through but I believe in God and I know that its not over until he says so...I will keep this family and little RB especially in my prayers....

rhoyaltempest · #7 11-02-2009, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JBaby1981

This must be a horrible thing for the parents to go through but I believe in God and I know that its not over until he says so...I will keep this family and little RB especially in my prayers....

I feel you but if a person will not survive once the machine is turned off, than God is saying that it's over and interfering in that when there is no chance for improvement is not right, to me.

DrPhil · #8 11-02-2009, 09:01 PM

Take him off the ventilator.

Keeping him on the ventilator is a selfish move for the parents.

Kevin · #9 11-02-2009, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

But...the ultimate question is, kill him now or let the disease kill him.

Actually, if they took him off the ventilator, the disease would kill him, not the parents.

It's a semantic difference, but not an insignificant one.

AOII Angel · #10 11-02-2009, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

But...the ultimate question is, kill him now or let the disease kill him.

Also in the article it does mention that they aren't sure which strain of this disease (congenital myasthenic syndrome,) the baby has and dependant on which, it can be treated.

I think my question is, has all options been exhausted and is it a matter of financial involvement that may be hindering his treatment?

This is what I hate about this whole debate! Withdrawing life support is NOT killing a patient. It is NOT providing extraordinary support to prolong life that cannot be supported by itself.

And if this is England, I doubt financial issues are at all involved. They have universal health care which should cover this child. This has to do with deciding whether or not it is more cruel to treat this child or to end his treatment.

Jill1228 · #11 11-02-2009, 02:46 PM

Quote:

The baby's parents are amicably separated, the father's lawyer said.

I bet it won't be amicable after this!

OMG, I wouldn't wish this choice on my worst enemy. That poor child

dreamseeker · #12 11-02-2009, 05:00 PM

this is terribly sad. i don't even want to offer an opinion on this one.

rhoyaltempest · #13 11-02-2009, 08:23 PM

This is a delicate situation but often times it's more about the parents than the children. Their emotions and the "I" in "I want my child to live" can sometimes stop them from making the best decision for the child. It's about the child's quality of life; it's not about the parents wanting to hold on. I wouldn't want my child to suffer until their death especially since there is no chance for them to improve.

nikki1920 · #14 11-16-2009, 10:34 AM

The father has relented and agreed to take the baby off the ventilator. The baby died over the weekend, I believe.

eta: here is the story
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe...ies/index.html

AOII Angel · #15 11-16-2009, 02:03 PM

How heart wrenching. I wish them peace with this decision.