Gard Case News Today

Sides to this, and i think that theres been a tendency to think that the court system in the u.k. has been irrational in its handling. let me welcome two experts on all matters of the law. two cnn contributors who are both legal eagles. how do you sort this one out? >> i think the problem with the case, michael, is americans are used to parents, and the parents rights and parents preferences being republspected the court systems. whats troubling about this case is the family says, look, we have ...

States. hospitals had sued many, many times for the right to withdraw life saving medical treatment in tile cases, and parents long oppose them. one thing mentioned earlier, michael, should we look at it both ways? courts intervene when courts do or dont want life saving treatment. well, we long recognized that the state has an interest in life. we see that in abortion cases. and because of that interest in life, the courts can take a bias view and air in favor of life, but they dont always have...

Fact we have a president who does not respect women and makes demeaning comments about them, demeaning comments about immigrants, their contribution to the society, and who belines them. that probably had something to do with the notion of an ugly american too because it goes against values we claim to be pushing all over the world, you know, values of freedom, liberty, and respect for human rights and other people. i just want to make that point. but, yes, its hard to -- you keep track of presi...

As much as it breaks my heart for these parents in this particular case, i think i do understand the rationale that says there needs to be an informed medical opinion that determines the outcome of this case that has charlie gards best interest at heart regardless of what the wishes of the parents might be. i know, it sounds harsh. i pray for him. im happy that hes been begin a reprieve, but the brits have the right idea, and in the end, medical science, not emotion, needs to best protect charli...

The case is far from resolved, and i find myself wrestling the question, who should be responsible for the final decisions regarding his medical care? his parents or physicians? charlie suffers from dna depletion syndrome. the condition causes progressive muscle weakness and brain damage. there are only about a dozen kids in the world who are known to have it. hes brain damaged, and accordsing to both the lower court and the high court ruling in this case, still suffering pain. he breathes with ...

Thats all im saying. when i first read in, i said, my god, its a death panel. this is horrific. then i read more about it. i thought, that little guys interests need to be advocated by someone, and i think the british system takes that into consideration. i wish we had more time. its an unbelievable debate. its like a law school exam and so damn sad his life hangs in the balance, but thank you, thank you danny, you know appreciate you both. >> one more, if i got time. as i say, being overwhelmed...

>> your position wiould be as long as somebody somewhere says they can help, then a court cannot withdraw medical treatment? thats a nice concept. its just never been the law neither in the u.k. nor the united states, especially the last 30 years. >> you got it wrong. im not saying somebody, somewhere. im talking about qualified medical professionals. >> what is qualified? what is futility. >> doctors can disagree about treatment, and in this case, as long as you have qualified medical professio...

Experts said she was brain girl, this little girl, they could not take her to rehab because of parents e preferences, but that has americans so concerned about charlies case, is why cant e he just come to the united states and get the help that some doctors say they can provide for. >> danny, respond to that, i guess the answer is, okay, if we were to come to the united states, and there were no relief, but the parents wanted to go further, at what point does the court system step in, if at all,...

For families being able to control what happens with their child. >> in that sense, you are right, but courtings have gone both ways, and federal law and state law including texas enacted statutes that allow hospitals to override the choices of parents, and in certain federal cases, it can go both ways. you are right. courts have gone both ways, but that does not mean that it is not reasonable and is not justifiable in some cases of medical futility for a hospital to sue for the right to say no....

Fight between the parents and hospital whether he should stay on life support. show me what weve got, as a matter of fact. its so absurd that the court gets to decide what the parents could do with the baby even when trump and the pope offered help. but, kevin, that was my gut reaction as well, but them you say, well, what if parents made an irrational decision? if the parents refused treatment like the case described in philadelphia where a family lost two of their children, wed be saying, some...