The Untimely Death of Charlie Gard

A baby died in England this week. This baby’s death shouldn’t go unsung because a tiny infant showed the world what becomes of the humans of the world when the ways of the world have come to a pass that full-term, living babies can be deprived of necessary treatment and not allowed a chance at life.

Although little Charlie Gard seemed in perfect health his first couple of months of life, he suddenly started failing and ended up in a hospital with a diagnosis that could be considered a definite death sentence if left untreated. Although it was a chance, at best, Charlie’s parents researched options, begged for financial help, and got in touch with an American doctor who said he would examine the baby. Seems like a ray of home in what was being touted as a no-win situation.

Even with money in hand and a place to take their baby, the United Kingdom’s courts and doctors refused to allow the parents this option. There would have not been a single charge to the hospital for taking the baby to that one chance of help but the doctors said an adamant, unexplained ‘NO!’ and the courts backed them up on their say so. The time line for saving Charlie began in January when first diagnosed. At that point in time, the treatment just might have been beneficial giving the parents a feeling of hope in doing all they could for their first child. The doctors dragged on the process and the court trials didn’t get the immediate hearings you would think the situation merited so we end up seven months later with a baby slowly deteriorating in health.

Even in the condition he was in this month, the American doctor made the trip over to examine the baby and met with the UK doctors. A doctor in Rome offered his help on this as the Pope was also anxiously watching this turn of events. Everything was rejected and the courts sided with the doctors.

It got worse even after the parents realized that time had run out on treating their baby due to the doctors’ lack of action. They allowed that their son’s little life was fast running it’s course and only asked that they could take him home to die. This was refused. From what I read, they took the baby to an undisclosed place where the doctors removed him from his life support and Charlie died.

I only wonder how much celebration was enjoyed by those grown men who fought so hard for the death of this baby. I wonder if the judges breathed a sign of relief to have this pesky situation finally put to rest being glad little Charlie was finally being put to rest.

To basically recap: The parents of a sick baby had the wherewithal to transport him to the United States for experimental treatment. There would be no further cost to the UK hospital. The doctors refused to give the baby this once chance and regulated the time the parents could spend with the baby. When the parents persisted, the courts stepped in and took away their parental rights to do the best they could for their son.

You have to ponder what was going through these people’s minds to constantly refuse to move an inch on possibly saving this innocent child. Do these doctors have children? Would they appreciate a stranger telling them they couldn’t decide what was good for their own children? Yet, the doctors involved and the courts thought nothing of depriving this little family of their God-given free will and rather than have their word contradicted and take an ego bruising, felt it was better to get rid of the evidence . . . little Charlie Gard.

I’m thinking there are a great many people in the world today shedding tears for this family and not thinking well of how the helpless are treated under the medical guidelines of the medical health care system of the United Kingdom. A doctor vows to do no harm. I didn’t see any evidence of compassion in the events of the last few months.

Over the years, so many atrocities have been committed under the guise of medical treatment, especially in what unborn get to live and who are thrown away. It seems to follow, in a way, that if you get used to dumping aborted babies into the trash that helping a live baby to their demise would just be another day’s work. AND, if you have the backing of the court, it looks like one takes a huge chance in trusting their health and eventual outcome to the powers that be who want to run our lives.

Unfortunately, this is not isolated to the UK. People might remember Terri Schiavo who was deliberately starved to death because that was her husband’s wish with the backing of doctors in spite of her having a family who wanted to save her. Another case was the teenager, Justina Pelletier, who held by the Boston Children’s Hospital based on a doctor’s view that she wasn’t being properly treated medically. She went in a healthy young lady and finally left in need of much health care and rehabilitation from her time in that hospital.

Many prayers needed, today, for Charlie Gard’s family as well as other people/children who might be in similar situations and not allowed their freedom of choice.

Freedom of Speech Mixed With Hypocrisy

There have been threats of boycotts of Georgia, Mississippi, and North Carolina because of criticism of state religious liberty measures being enacted. It seems, however, that the almighty dollar eases into first place when it comes to various vocal companies who, while they say they stand with the side of the gay, lesbian, transgender, and bisexual citizens of the United States, their work ethics seem to say otherwise. While these companies are actively threatening the above mentioned states, their companies are situated in countries that are most adamantly against the people they say they support. While these companies are using their freedoms of speech and choice, their actual business practices seem to show them turning a blind eye to reality.

Big corporations have come out to criticize state religious liberty measures in Georgia, Mississippi, and North Carolina as discriminating against those who aren’t heterosexual, some going as far as to propose boycotting states that enact such laws.

Unilever’s CEO said that many businesses would boycott Georgia’s HB 757 religious liberty bill if it were signed into law. BUT, Unilever has facilities in countries like Algeria and Tunisia that make homosexual activity illegal.

Microsoft company president said that he was very much opposed to Georgia’s HB 757 even as the company goes along with censorship policies in China.

An Intel CEO also in opposition to the pending Georgia HB 757 bill yet is working with Vietnam’s government which ‘bans all independent political parties, labor unions, and human rights organizations.’

Bruce Springsteen opted out of scheduled appearances in North Carolina in protest of recently enacted religious liberty laws. Did they remember that they organization has venues and hosts events in places like the United Arab Emirates who doesn’t share their stand on the religious liberty matter?

AMC Networks seems to be good at taking a stand for one side yet maintaining business practices with countries who are opposed to that stand. AMC broadcasts in Russia who enacted anti-gay laws.

Time Warner says the religious liberty bill in Georgia actually violates vales and inclusion and discrimination. Time Warner’s empire extends into Singapore which bans homosexual activity.

Walt Disney and Marvel Entertainment join the hypocritical companies claiming one thing and taking advantage of another. The Disney folks are investing billions into a theme park in Shanghai where this communist state has no laws protecting people from discrimination on gender identity. I wonder how they will call that park ‘the happiest place on earth’ except for depositing their financial take each day.

And a good, old power company, General Electric, taps in with their ‘sincere’ upset over the Mississippi ‘discriminatory law while still doing business in Saudi Arabia, a country where they provide jail time and lashings for using social media for meeting same-sex partners.

PayPal will be punishing North Carolina by canceling proposed plans for new business centers in Charlotte, North Carolina. North Carolina’s ‘bathroom law’, according to PayPal perpetuates discrimination which goes against the principles of their company . . . except, supposedly, when it comes to having service in Mauritania, Yemen, Somalia, and Saudi Arabia where homosexuality is punishable with death. In Nigeria, the punishment could be caning, death by stoning, or imprisonment.

Apple Inc. spoke out against Mississippi’s bill and the North Carolina bill. Their statement was, “Our future as Americans should be focused on inclusion and prosperity, and not discrimination and division.” Again, an outspoken company fails to think past their soapbox to realize that their ‘word’ doesn’t always extend past their profit margin. Another company in China, specifically, the Xinjiang region that has ethnic discrimination, religious repression and cultural suppression.

Netflix offers service to Libya. Enough said as we all know where that country stands on human right and freedom of religion.

The Sony empire is pledging to boycott Georgia over the disputed bill while also have an office in Kazakhstan where freedom of expression and peaceful assembly is restricted and punishable. So, if Sony wanted to stand up for what it is protesting in the United States over on Kazakhstan soil, it could be a problem?

(Basically, Mississippi signed a bill to protect ‘sincerely held religious beliefs or moral convictions’. HB 1523 would not limit any constitutionally protected rights or actions of any citizens of the state. North Carolina signed HB2 requiring individuals to use public restrooms that corespond to their biological sex.)