Page 2 - Gard Case News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

That's all i'm saying. when i first read in, i said, my god, it's a death panel. this is horrific. then i read more about it. i thought, that little guy's interests need to be advocated by someone, and i think the british system takes that into consideration. i wish we had more time. it's an unbelievable debate. it's 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 on twitter and facebook comments on the case. advocated for death pams. no, see, i did not ju...

>> your position wiould be as long as somebody somewhere says they can help, then a court cannot withdraw medical treatment? that's a nice concept. it's just never been the law neither in the u.k. nor the united states, especially the last 30 years. >> you got it wrong. i'm not saying somebody, somewhere. i'm 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 professionals in the united states saying they can provide treatment, why would a country deny the child ...

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 charlie's case, is why can't 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, and say, okay, it's gone too far. he's suffering pain, go ahead, d danny. >> since the early '90s...

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. >> danny, i -- a wise course for me would be to say absolutely nothing further, but i can't resist,...

Fight between the parents and hospital whether he should stay on life support. show me what we've got, as a matter of fact. it's 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, we'd be saying, somebody do something, let the court intervene for crying out loud, so maybe the reverse needs to be ...