EUTHANASIA ALLOWED IN BRITAIN FOR A CHILD AGAINST PARENT'S WILL

Prof Dr,DRAM,HIV /AIDS,HEPATITIS ,SEX DISEASES & WEAKNESS expert,New Delhi,India, +917838059592

" EUTHANASIA" or Mercy Killing or Doctor Assisted suicide or Active Euthanasia is banned in United kingdom as in India but as our supreme court allowed to remove life supporting System in a very moriband ,debilitated patient where life cant be revived by all possible practical ways ,Passive Euthanasia allowed in UK first time for by a court for 10-month-old Charlie Gard is battling a rare genetic condition called infantile-onset encephalomyopathic mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome, or MDDS even against will of his parents who wanted to continue the treatment by Hospital. He also suffers from brain damage which has snatched away his ability to move his arms and legs, eat or breathe on his own. He has been connected to machines to help keep him alive.His parents, Chris Gard and Connie Yates, admitted him to the Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London when his condition was diagnosed. After putting in all their efforts, the hospital staff said they could do no more and advised the parents to allow their baby to move on.However, the parents didn't agree and wanted to try other ways to help their child. While the hospital maintained that nothing could be done to save Charlie, the parents adamantly argued that there was an experimental treatment in the United States they had not yet tried.The hospital inquired whether this was legal and in Charlie's best interest, for them (the hospital) to remove him from life support — even against his parents' wishes. In a ruling in April, Justice Nicholas Francis of the Family Division of the High Court of Justice wrote that there was “unanimity among the experts from whom I have heard that nucleoside therapy cannot reverse structural brain damage.”“Transporting Charlie to the USA would be problematic, but possible,” he added. “Subjecting him to nucleoside therapy is unknown territory — it has never even been tested on mouse models — but it may, or may not, subject the patient to pain, possibly even to mutations. But if Charlie’s damaged brain function cannot be improved, as all seem to agree, then how can he be any better off than he is now, which is in a condition that his parents believe should not be sustained?” On Tuesday, the court declined to hear the case further, thereby upholding previous court rulings to let Charlie die.