« British Courts Rule Against Charlotte Wyatt | Main | House Committee Holds Hearing on Terri Schiavo, Protecting Disabled »


April 21, 2005

Baby Charlotte Wyatt Needs Help: She Wants To Live (Updated)

Topics: Action Items, International
Because she would likely never have the chance to run and play like other children, doctors decided that it was in her best interest to let her die.

We received the information about Charlotte Wyatt by email today, and we've been asked as a group to help get the message out about her plight. All BlogsForTerri Blogs are encouraged to look into this matter and help get Charlotte the MSM attention she deserves(hopefully the life-kind of media attention).

Baby Charlotte.jpg

Eighteen months ago, Charlotte was born premature, with severe health problems. She had to be resuscitated three times. (She is not on a resuscitator, although she does get help from an oxygen tent.) Six months ago the hospital caring for Charlotte sought permission not to resuscitate her again -- over the vehement objections of her Christian parents-- and a British High Court judge ruled on the side of the hospital.

The hospital said that Charlotte was deaf and blind. But she can now see and hear.

The hospital said that Charlotte would die of an infection over the winter. But she's still alive.

Now hospital sources "admit the 18-month-old baby may live on for 'a considerable time' -- potentially years rather than months."

Charlotte's parents went back to court a month ago to ask the judge to allow Charlotte at least some time (even if only five days) on a ventilator if she needs the help again. The judge delayed his decision a month.

Now it has been a month, and there has been a defeat in the courts.

It wasn't enough. Justice Hedley was glad that little Charlotte could see, hear, respond and smile, but believed his former ruling should continue to hold--- no resuscitation. This on hearing from the majority medical opinion--- the same opinion that last autumn held that she was permanently blind, deaf,and unresponsive, and would never survive the winter--- that she was 'terminally ill' and therefore any aggresive treatment would be pointless.

Who to believe? In this case it seems obvious. You have a little girl fighting for her life, and she has proven to the world her life is not dead-ended. You have her parents who want to fight with her till the end, till all hope is gone. And the doctors, who consider it in her best interest to die. Note that these are the same who judged for David Glass that he had no hope and his "best interests" lay in "allowing" him to die.

There is a caveat in the judge's ruling-- he notes that this new decision is not open-ended and is subject to review. What evidence will he need, I wonder, to decide in her favor?

But Charlotte hasn't given up, and we won't either. SHE NEEDS OUR HELP!

Background Information For Bloggers and Blog Readers:

Charlotte in the MSM

Charlotte's Photo Album

Baby 'should be allowed to die'
BBC News--04/20/05

Life-or-death day for baby Charlotte
The Times--04/17/05

Charlotte in the Blogosphere

Charlotte Wyatt
UK Commentators--04/19/05

Baby Charlotte to Get Ventilator Verdict This Week?
MediaCulpa Blog--04/19/05

Life Or Death Decisions This Week
Slobokan's Site O' Schtuff--04/17/05

UPDATE: A Few Contact Numbers

Main Hospital Number: (023) 9228 6000
The above telephone number will put you through to the main switchboard, who can then direct your call to the appropriate ext.

Chief Executive's telephone number: 023 9228 6770

Chairman's telephone number: 023 9228 6427

Cross posted at Hyscience

Posted by richard at April 21, 2005 8:30 AM


Articles Related to Action Items, International:

Comments

For those interested in Emailing the media to alert them to Baby Charlotte: (just copy and paste list into your "TO:" box)


Rush@EIBNet.com, kherman@statesman.com, 19Latest@daily.misleader.org, greenpartyusa@igc.org, pjnyden@wvgazette.com, ellengoodman@globe.com, shadowland@newsweek.com, news@reedbusiness.com, MyWord@FoxNews.com, REvans@mercurynews.com, JHubner@Mercurynews.com, prez@usa-exile.org, Malibunews@malibutimes.com, Margolis@foreigncorrespondent.com, FNS@FoxNews.com, Beltway@FoxNews.com, Hannity@FoxNews.com, Colmes@FoxNews.com, alan@alan.com, jim.mills@foxnews.com, Newswatch@FoxNews.com, Oreilly@FoxNews.com, Special@Foxnews.com, latenight@nbc.com, tdp@nt.net, Newswatch@foxnews.com, letters@nypost.com, Moneyline@CNN.com, cushman@nytimes.com, abramsreport@msnbc.com, Hardball@MSNBC.com, evening@cbsnews.com, weekends@cbsnews.com, Questions@MSNBC.com, Joe@msnbc.com, Imus@MSNBC.com, Question@msnbc.com, Nightly@NBC.com, MTP@NBC.com, Crossfire@cnn.com, Wolf@CNN.com, CapReport@cnbc.com, Reliable@cnn.com, newsroom@bergen.com, Jeff.newsstand@cnn.com, Rwallace@herald.com, Arobinson@herald.com, babingtonc@washpost.com, newhnews@ncia.net, Letters@prospect.org, letters@cmonitor.com, inquirer.letters@phillynews.com, letters@detnews.com, DYJackson@tribune.com, ddefenoyl@globeandmail.ca, valley@latimes.com, business@latimes.com, ventura@latimes.com, metrodesk@latimes.com, news-tips@nytimes.com, the-arts@nytimes.com, bizday@nytimes.com, metro@nytimes.com, national@nytimes.com, washington@nytimes.com, online.editor@thetimes.co.uk, rcribb@thestar.ca, foreign.news@thetimes.co.uk, dbrazao@thestar.ca, ldiebel@thestar.ca, 2020@abc.com, thisweek@abc.com, nightline@abcnews.com , mike@mikemalloy.com, rrhodes@airamericaradio.com, info@alternativeradio.org , info@alternet.org, talk2us@americasblackforum.com, feedback@ap.org, msilverman@ap.org, rfournier@ap.org, hunt@ap.org, bsenftleber@ajc.com, bsteiden@ajc.com, hklibanoff@ajc.com, rnarayanan@ajc.com, atrios@comcast.net, newsonline@bbc.co.uk, anita@mindgallery.com, jfetzer@d.umn.edu, hprzybyla@bloomberg.net, hrosenkrantz@bloomberg.net, ombud@globe.com, kcooper@globe.com, oliphant@globe.com, brelis@globe.com, lettersbwol@businessweek.com, richard_dunham@businessweek.com, buzzflash@buzzflash.com, query@cambridgeforum.org, 48hours@cbsnews.com, 60m@cbsnews.com, bpc@cbsnews.com, ftn@cbsnews.com, sundays@cbsnews.com, grain@cbsnews.com, aweathersbee@suntimes.com, cledbetter@suntimes.com, showcase@suntimes.com, jcruickshank@suntimes.com, sneed@suntimes.com, ddouglas@suntimes.com, rkemper@tribune.com, cgarrett@tribune.com, GWashburn@tribune.com, jzeleny@tribune.com, MPossley@tribune.com, jcrewdson@tribune.com, bmccauley@enquirer.com, dhorn@enquirer.com, jborgman@enquirer.com, jloven@ap.org, kcarroll@ap.org, npickler@ap.org, sjohnson@ap.org, cwarmbold@ajc.com, wilsonc@timesrecordnews.com, drudge@drudgereport.com
, news@worldnetdaily.com, letters@worldnetdaily.com, Hannity@foxnews.com, Colmes@foxnews.com, me@glennbeck.com

Posted by: Straight Up with Sherri at April 21, 2005 12:06 PM

That's so crazy! Why would the judge not change his mind now, even knowing she is hearing and seeing and responding now?! Does he just have a death wish for this darling little girl?!! OK, I am praying for her from right now....and starting to write the MSM email addy's above.

Posted by: juleni at April 21, 2005 12:30 PM

This kind of thing is awful. A baby. A BABY!

this is what you get in a culture that allows people to kill their children before birth - people killing children AFTER birth.

Where is the respect for these parents who want to see to the proper care of their child? Can the judge order that she be taken to another hospital? What provisions are there in British law to protect life?

Is it somehow possible to bring the child to the US to be treated in a facility that is more family-friendly (just keep her out of Florida ... )?

There has to be someone willing to work with this family SOMEWHERE ... If that hospital doesn't want to do it, maybe there's another that does? Aren't there Catholic hospitals in England??

Just a few thoughts.

RWR

Posted by: RightWingRocker at April 21, 2005 2:21 PM

This is so unbelievable. Well, I can email and I can pray-those are two things I am proficient at doing. Thanks Sherri for always having all the technical info.

This is happening in Enlgand correct? I lived in England for three years duing the Clinton presidency when Hillary was big into the National health care system idea. I did some research because I wanted to see how exactly a national health care system would work. This is what I remember of it (I could be off and I do not want to get into an argument on it I just am trying to make a point which I will get to in a minute)In England, each county is allocated so much money and resources for any one kind of operation-say for instance you need a operation on your kidney, but in your area all the kidney operations are taken up for that year-you have to go to a different county or wait until the next year.

My point is that I am sitting here wondering what the big deal is in keeping her alive-her parents want her alive and she can live, but I wonder, is this a case where she is taking up to many resources and do we need to find that out and hit things from that angle?

Just a thought.

Posted by: alwayschooselife at April 21, 2005 2:23 PM

This child is 18 months old...she is no longer an infant and to not treat this "well established
life" will be murder. She needs to be receiving Early intervention therapies and developmental training. This is horrifying ruling!

Might I remind the British Courts that Helen Keller was also deaf blind from brain injury due to Scarlet Fever (no antibiotics)at the age of 18 months. They called her hopeless also. She and thousands of other survivors of disease lived on under the protection, care and education of sentive professionals who created educational and communication methodsspecific to their needs. These "hopeless" people went on to become self supporting citizens. But that was back in the 1880's when society thought it was best to treat and educated disabledchildren ...not slaughter them like our enlightened modern courts do !. All over the world schools for the Deaf and schools for the Blind were established in the 1800's by wealthy philantropic endowments TO PROTECT AND ENABLE DISABLED CHILDREN. These schools and methods all began in Europe and then spresads to the US! There were special schols for the disabled in America before there were Public Schools ! How can English courts ignore the hundreds of years of successful habilitation and education of multiply handicapped people???
Now, in moderen times, when we have such marvelous health care and such incredible adaptive devices for the disabled...now is NOT the time to throw in the towel on these people..
Charlotte should nnot die....Has this Judge ever met her...? They need to get habilitative experts on her side...they need to get the state ments from early intervention experts who have worked with her.....This is a terrifying ruling!

We have to do something....can we connect the parents with an American Hospital that will treat her....? Children's Hospital in Phila comes to mind?

Posted by: JoJoFox at April 21, 2005 2:25 PM

I love this country-the USA, but I am not sure bringing her here is the best plan-after all, we do not exactly have the best record on life these last few months.
Is this a case where an operation could save her? If it is then yes bring her here and have it done, but if it is not then what would bringing her here involve-would her parents have to get Visas and work cards and permission to stay indefinetely? If they could not, then when she had to go back to the UK would she not be in the same position she is in now?
If that is all the case then I would love to buy her some time by getting her here-if she could even travel in that condition, but there needs to be a permanent solution on the other end.

Posted by: alwayschooselife at April 21, 2005 3:10 PM

Regardless of what the recent months have brought ot light about our court system's right to die rulings...our training hospitals are world reknown for their quality child care...siamese twins separations, organ transplants, limb attachments, etc...yopungsters are flown here from all over the world. If there is a problem with medically caring for Charlotte in England then the parents really should investigate their avenues to getting her here. Our hospitals love the press....and Charlotte would have the best care. As a special Educator I can say that our Early Intervention preschools are packed with kids like Charlotte !!!! By law they begin their education as early as possible...I have worked with Multihandicapped babies as young as 9 months.
Charlotte's pictures show that she is a pretty little child. No significant deformaties....facially normal. Her eyes are misaligned due to a probable significant visual impairment. Babies with significant visual impairments often are delayed in motor developement and need trained stimulation to catch up to chronological peers. Our vision calls our attention away from ourselves and gets us reaching, rolling, crawling et al. Without the stimulation of visual targets of interest, babies just lie on their backs with random arma and leg movements.
Baby Charlotte needs to be seen by a hospital staff specializing in baby disabilities..and stimulation. ASAP

Posted by: JoJoFox at April 21, 2005 3:30 PM

This is outside of my normal "action" item ideas- but I have been calling children's hospitals begging for a lead-- none so far except one woman who is contacting a philanthropy organization where someone may know of someone that can help.

It is time consuming- but hey- it may worth a shot... DOes anyone else have any ideas???

If MSM would pick this up- a doctor might come forward and say- bring her here- we'll help...

Posted by: Straight Up with Sherri at April 21, 2005 3:48 PM

I agree with that in theory, but what I am getting at is that the whole idea is way more complicated than just bringing her over here. There is a lot involoved in that, especially if you are not dealing with a life saving operation(such as siamese twins). If it will help Charlotte then you are right-it needs to be done but that still does not solve the problem-for tomorrow there will be another child. We cant just move them all-we have to come up with a solution to this.

Posted by: alwayschooselife at April 21, 2005 3:53 PM

alwayschooselife

One Starfish at a time.

Posted by: Straight Up with Sherri at April 21, 2005 3:56 PM

I also have to wonder if the British courts have custody of Charlotte-I would think they have too in order to estabilsh a DNR order. So, I guess yes, see if there is a hospital that will take her and then work on the rest later. My other thought is that if there is enough press on this it will make the British courts want to change their ruling so they don't look like America on this one. Reverse psychology in a way?
I did all the emails-thanks again Sherri.
If there is anyone we can contact to help get her get here once someone has found a hospital-I am thinking senators and congress maybe?

Posted by: alwayschooselife at April 21, 2005 4:00 PM

Okay-I just get so frustrated that there is nothing to stop this forever-It makes me soooooo incredibly sad

Posted by: alwayschooselife at April 21, 2005 4:01 PM

alwayschooselife

WOW! Do I understand! I get so frustrated also. It's great to have each other to keep us motivated. Many times when I get discouraged, God sends me a comment through one of you all that reminds me that none of this is in vain...

THANKS TO EVERY ONE OF YOU!!

Posted by: Straight Up with Sherri at April 21, 2005 4:04 PM

Okay my brain is racing here, but something else-if this is a case of a National Health Care System that is low on funding(which I still think needs to be asked)-maybe raising money somehow for her so she could have private insurance(they do have that too-it just costs money and most do not have it because of the NHS)would be another avenue to pursue on this one.

Posted by: alwayschooselife at April 21, 2005 4:05 PM

Multiply handicapped children are medically highrisk. They needa medical support system that will act to rescue them from even regular illnesses...colds, diariah, rashes, fevers.These can be devastating to a regualar 18 month old but when they effect a MH child they can be disasterous without a medical support system. Charlotte will need medications as she gets older ( most likely seizure meds, ) And from her photos she needs visual interventions.....babies her age are fitted with elaborate visual adaptations.... Without a medical suport system. She needs auditory training..a hearing aid....my students have had them at age 1 years old. Untreated severe sensory impairmants can leave the child under stimulated and lathargic...creating a negative effect on health and development. can I would first like to see her get to a hospital that is willing to treat her.Then get her the stimulation and intervention she developmentally needs. It is cruel to just let her grow with no developmental intervention. The parents may or may not know that intevention exists....In the US pediatricians usually get the child registers with the county and district services....I am not sure how England manages their disabled toddlers.

I can understand that one hospital does not want to treat her ...does that mean that ALL English hospitals won't treat her? Is St Mary's a specialty hospital....or a local hospital ?

What is the University in England that turns out Special Education Teachers...they could tell what services are available in England.

Posted by: JoJoFox at April 21, 2005 5:06 PM

Hello everyone. I'm the person (or one of the people if someone else contacted BlogsforTerri) who brought this up.
To answer some of the questions about British healthcare: It's socialised, so tax money goes in and all medical treatment is free at the point of use. Whatever the politics of this, Cuba, we're not. There's *plenty* of cash in the system to care for little Charlotte, and that's absolutely not the issue here. Also, the hospital in question have already spent £150,000 ($290,000) on legal bills fighting Charlotte's parents in court, so go figure.
Next, as far as I'm aware, Charlotte's parents still have custody over her, but can't find any NHS (National Health Service) doctors willing to offer her life-saving interventions should she need them. (Charlotte's father, though, is only allowed to see his daughter in the company of a security guard after doctors said they felt 'threatened' by him -- Gee, I wonder why that is?)
Lastly, the reason the hospital brought the case to court was to avoid being sued by Charlotte's parents if she died because they refused to intervene. The problem for Charlotte's parents is solely that they can't find anyone willing to treat their daughter if she needs life-saving treatment, which, at some point, she almost certainly will.

Posted by: RottyPup at April 21, 2005 5:21 PM

That is very, very sad, and all those questions being answered tells me that she needs to get over here-if only it were that simple. Does anyone know anything about getting them a sponser to help get them here? Is that the answer to this or this there any chance of getting that ruling in England reversed or finding a Doctor in England who would take care of her. There has to be someone-someone in the whole country of England-some Doctor that would take care of her.

Posted by: alwayschooselife at April 21, 2005 8:02 PM

WOW Have you seen this-same hospital-just a few months ago.
The rest of the story is http://www.members.tripod.com/davidglass1/#David%27s%20Story

Press release issued by the Registrar

CHAMBER JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF GLASS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing a judgment[1][1] in the case of Glass v. the United Kingdom (application no. 61827/00).

The Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 8 (right to respect for private life) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Under Article 41 (just satisfaction) of the Convention, the Court awarded the applicants 10,000 euros (EUR) for non-pecuniary damage and EUR 15,000 for costs and expenses. (The judgment is available only in English.)

1. Principal facts

The applicants, Carol and David Glass, are both United Kingdom nationals. David, born in 1986, is severely mentally and physically disabled and requires 24-hour attention. Ms Glass is David’s mother and legal proxy.

In July 1998 David was admitted to St Mary’s Hospital, one of two hospitals belonging to the Portsmouth Hospitals National Health Service Trust. Following an operation to alleviate an upper respiratory tract obstruction, David suffered complications, became critically ill and had to be put on a ventilator. During his treatment, Ms Glass was informed by hospital staff that David was dying and that further intensive care would be inappropriate. However, David’s condition improved and he was able to return home on 2 September 1998 .

On 8 September 1998 , when David was re-admitted to the hospital with a respiratory tract infection, doctors discussed with Ms Glass the possible use of morphine to alleviate distress. Ms Glass expressed her opposition, telling doctors that if David’s heart stopped she would expect resuscitation including intubation. Dr W. considered that this would not be in David’s best interests, and stated in his notes that a “second opinion”, if necessary from the courts, was needed. Dr H. also noted that “in the event of total disagreement we should be obliged to go to the courts”.

David’s condition deteriorated. On 20 October 1998 the doctors treating David considered that he was dying and recommended that diamorphine be given to him to relieve his distress. Ms Glass did not agree that her son was dying and was very concerned that the administration of diamorphine (previously morphine had been mentioned) would compromise his chances of recovery. Ms Glass voiced her concerns at a meeting with the doctors at which a police officer was also present.

She subsequently asked to take David home if he was dying, but a police officer advised her that if she attempted to remove him, she would be arrested. David was given a diamorphine infusion at 7 p.m. on 20 October 1998 .

A dispute broke out in the hospital involving other family members and the doctors. The family members believed that David was being covertly euthanased and attempted to prevent the doctors from entering his room. The hospital authorities called the security staff and threatened to exclude the family from the hospital by force.

A “Do Not Resuscitate” (DNR) order was put in the first applicant’s medical notes without consulting Ms Glass.

The following day Ms Glass found that her son’s condition had deteriorated alarmingly and was worried that this was due to the effect of diamorphine. The family demanded that diamorphine be stopped. Dr W. stated that this was only possible if they agreed not to resuscitate David. However, the family tried to revive David and a fight broke out between members of the family and the doctors. While the fight was going on, Ms Glass successfully resuscitated David.

Police were summoned to the hospital. Dr W. and Dr A. and several police officers were injured and all but one of the children on the ward had to be evacuated.

David’s condition improved and he went home on 21 October 1998 .

Ms Glass applied unsuccessfully for judicial review and permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal concerning the decisions taken by the hospital authority.

The General Medical Council found that the doctors involved had not been guilty of serious professional misconduct or seriously deficient performance and that the treatment complained of had been justified. The Crown Prosecution Service did not bring charges against the doctors involved for lack of evidence.

Posted by: alwayschooselife at April 21, 2005 8:12 PM

Ooooh, this is all so much, too much. If David or Charlotte were kittens in the street, who among us wouldn't take them home. I can't make any intelligent or helpful comments here. It's all too much.

Posted by: mary et. al. at April 21, 2005 9:00 PM

Oh my gosh, RottyPup!! What is going on here? This is worldwide? Have the medical practices gone nuts? First David, now Charlotte? And over here, first Terri, then Mae then Clara? How many non-terminal people do they willingly wish to extinguish like flames made into embers? I am overwhelmed.

RottyPup, would an effort to collect money help at all, on our side of the pond?

Are any doctors available outside of the NHS to help, who could be contacted for help?

Otherwise, I think she needs to travel to another country to escape the death law that has overshadowed her situation at that hospital.

Please, tell us what you think would be most profitable to her life.

(I'm checking into paypal right now to see how/if they manage collections for someone.)

Posted by: juleni at April 21, 2005 9:23 PM

The good news is that if you read the rest of the story on David he is doing okay now.
I found some more information that stated that because this is a ntional helth care system-thus funded by taxes, the courts feel they have an even bigger role in the how funds are spent. Fiscal Responsibility(sarcasm)
To think, we could have a NHS in this country someday too-which leads back to the "most important vote"

Posted by: alwayschooselife at April 21, 2005 10:35 PM

National Health Care System-sorry I cannot spell.

Posted by: alwayschooselife at April 21, 2005 10:38 PM

Here are some links for European Prolife agencies-the first I think is in Germany-the rest are British. There should be email available for each of them.


EPLD - European Pro-Life-Doctors

Dr.(I) Gero Winkelmann, (M.D.)
Founder and Coordinator of EPLD
Physician, ermergency and homeopatic doctor;
Truderinger Str. 53

D - 82008 Unterhaching / Munich

Tel. ++49 - (0) 89 - 61 50 171- 7
Fax - 8

e-mail: info@epld.org
Spoken foreign languages: German, English, Italian and a little bit french.

Centre for Bioethics and Public Policy
www.cbpp.ac.uk


Centre for Bioethics & Human Dignity
http://www.cbhd.org

National Right to Life
www.nrlc.org
I
nternational Anti-Euthanasia Task Force
www.iaetf.org

Legislation Links

UK Houses of Parliament Home Page
www.parliament.uk

Legislation
www.hmso.gov.uk/legis.htm

The National Assembly for Wales
www.wales.gov.uk

The North Ireland Assembly
www.ni-assembly.gov.uk

Official Report of Scottish Parliament
www.scottish.parliament.uk/official_report/meeting.html

Media Links

BBC UK News
www.news.bbc.co.uk

The PA News Centre
www.ananova.com

Links to Political Parties

The Main Political Parties

All registered political parties
http://www.electoralcommission.gov.uk/regulatory-issues/partylinks.cfm

Posted by: alwayschooselife at April 21, 2005 11:25 PM

I am also in the process of putting together a list of prolife docs and their corresponding email addresses-it is just taking a while to find them 9the email addresses)-I figure this could be used for this case as well as for the idea of the shelter. If anyone wants to help-the list is longggggggggg

Posted by: alwayschooselife at April 21, 2005 11:31 PM

I want to help, Always.

Posted by: mary et. al. at April 22, 2005 8:08 AM

alwayschooselife wrote: "I want to help, Always."

Glad to hear it, but remember I'm in a different time zone ;)

I've just contacted the people over at Charlotte's website in Britain, so hopefully they'll either get back to me, or drop in on this thread with more information.

I'll keep everyone here posted as soon as I learn anything elese.

Posted by: RottyPup at April 22, 2005 11:11 AM

I'm encouraging people to write to President Bush, asking him to publically denounce the Judge's rulings and to apply as much pressure as he can. Don't know if it will help but I don't see how it can hurt.

Posted by: Jen at April 22, 2005 1:03 PM

And Jen, it might be the one thing, perhaps the one last thing, that God is calling someone to do. That's why it's so important never to give up hope, never to think that any little thing won't help. That was the message I kept getting fighting for fourteen straight days for Terri. I used to pray, Oh Lord, I'm so exhausted. How will this one last call on my part make the least difference? And God, who I believe has a sense of humor, asked of me, how do you know that's not the last call I want made? That's why I'll always believe Terri was and is a patron saint to this world. How do we know that that one least pleading we made wasn't the last that God required of us in His effort to speak His love to someone, that as soon as that last call was made, our Lord took Terri home and is holding her to his heart, that our Lord is saying to Terri, so many have proved their faith and their love because of you, Terri. That was the pleading message I gave wherever I could. Never give up. Never think the least little thing we do isn't of vital importance.

Posted by: dea at April 22, 2005 1:18 PM

dea, right on. Remember when Jesus said, "It is done." As victim He drank the last drop; as God He knew when it was the last drop. We can't know the last drop from the rest; we can only keep drinking until HE says "It is done." And look what wonderful things came of Terri and the Schindlers and the bloggers following in His footsteps.

RottyPup, love your name. I've gotten three here only I say "Rotten dogs!" Please do stay in touch. I don't have anything scathingly brilliant yet, but I'm staying on it and if I do find something I will pass it on immediately. I would hate for a simple communications break down to bring about a negative effect.

Posted by: mary et. al. at April 22, 2005 2:19 PM

Hi. I just received the following email from Hannah, who runs Charlotte's website:


Hi John,


I wish I could tell you something specific they can do... but I don't know. The case will go to the Court of Appeals and, if the ruling there is again negative, her mum and dad want to try the European Court.


The main thing we need to do right now is make people realise that this is a little child's life. And that just because she may not grow up to do all the things they can does not mean that her life is not worthwhile.


Last autumn the newspapers were repeating everything the doctors said, painting the sort of picture that would convince nearly everyone that it would be cruel to keep her alive. She was blind, deaf, unresponsive to anything but pain, and with no hope of ever getting any better. You can see from her pictures now how wrong they were; and doctors now have agreed that she does now have at least limited vision, and responds to loud noises. And she has shown them that she knows how to smile. We need to bring her face in front of them so they know who it is they are talking about. It is easy to pass judgement on someone you do not know.


Perhaps they could write letters to the media. The major newspapers all have websites, and you could find email addresses there. Especially if they come across articles that leaves out Charlotte's side of the story, they could write and try to give some of the facts. If they are bloggers they could write about it in their blogs also, and link to her photos; the internet, at least, spans continents.


There ought to be something more they can do, but I don't know. I'll be talking to people in the next few days, and I'll let you know if we can come up with anything. Keep us updated, too, from your side.


Thank you for doing this.

-Hannah


Obviously, this is a difficult (and busy) time for the Wyatt family, so until we learn more as to what their plans are, and what help they need, I think Hannah's advice is sound.

We need to get as many bloggers onto Charlotte's story as possible, as well as news organisations.
Also, we need to be stressing the fact that Charlotte's doctors have been wrong about her condition in the past. When this case first came up last October, Charlotte was presented as, essentially, a baby who was terminally ill. The court ruled on the advice of doctors that she would die during the winter months. Doctors also insisted that Charlotte was profoundly blind, deaf, and unresponsive. Yet. They now admit she can see, hear and is smiling and interacting with her family. Doctors also claimed her condition left her seriously malnourished, though they now admit she's gaining weight.

The point about this is that that Charlotte has proved her doctors wrong in so many ways, and yet the courts are still ruling on the strength of the original information that Charlotte was a blind, deaf, unresponsive and dying baby.

I think we need to stress the fact that she's none of these things (keep using/linking to the photographs of Charlotte), and that she deserves a chance at life.

Another point worth making (or countering if someone else brings it up) is that this isn't an issue of the state deciding Charlotte isn't worth saving. Yes, Britain's healthcare system is socialised, but it's not cash-starved, and Charlotte's plight isn't a matter of state/government policy. What this is, *all* this is, about is a clinical decision taken by Charlotte's doctors at a particular hospital. It isn't the state or government who have gone to court in this case, but St. Mary's hospital, who wanted this ruling to prevent Charlotte's parents suing them in the event that they failed to act to save her life. I think this is important, because, as I've stressed, these doctors have been proved dead wrong about other aspects of Charlotte's development. This is the central issue here.
It might also be worth referring to the case of David Glass

http://www.members.tripod.com/davidglass1/#David%27s%20Story

that alwayschooselife mentioned earlier. This happened at the same hospital, though, because of gag rulings, we don't know whether it happened with the same doctors.


OK. That's all for now. I'll keep you posted on any further developments.

Posted by: RottyPup at April 22, 2005 4:57 PM

RP-Do you know if there is any chance they would want to go to another country if the care was offered to them?

Posted by: alwayschooselife at April 22, 2005 7:01 PM

This is what I have for media contacts in England so far-

BBC WORLD SERVICE (RADIO News)
Reception - Tel: 020 7240 3456 Fax: 020 7557 1258 send a fax
E-mail: worldservice@bbc.co.uk

TV NEWS STATIONS

BBC NEWS 24
Have your say
Have your say by sending us your views and news pictures:
Email: haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk
Text: 07736 100 100
3G mail: 07888 100 100
Pictures: yourpics@bbc.co.uk
Website: bbc.co.uk/haveyoursay

BBC NewsWatch (fill out the form)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ukfs/hi/newsid_3950000/newsid_3958800/3958817.stm

BBC Panarama (fill out email form)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ukfs/hi/newsid_3710000/newsid_3714800/3714882.stm

BBC Breakfast(fill out email form)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ukfs/hi/newsid_3950000/newsid_3959000/3959043.stm

Posted by: alwayschooselife at April 22, 2005 7:36 PM

I went to Charlotte's website at http://charlottewyatt.blogspot.com/ and watched the video of her parents being interviewed in the news last night. They are such gentle people, and my heart went out to them. I felt, watching them, the way I felt watching the Schindlers: a very deep concern and love for them.

They said that they would take Charlotte home and care for her there, if they only had the right equipment for the home, to care for her, but that that costs money. What if we could take up a collection for them? Would everyone pitch in?

They also countered the one arguement that the British media is using in another film clip, that Charlotte's brain hasn't grown, therefore she must be dying, by saying that Charlotte's brain has grown a bit, just not as fast as normal.

THAT DOES NOT MEAN DYING!!!

Retardation of growth or of mental capacity in NO WAY means dying! They are creating a false view of Charlotte....

Finally, their plea, "If there is any hospital out there who shares our views and is willing to help and to take Charlotte, please contact us, because she needs a place where she will be truly cared for and valued." may indicate anywhere in the world, but we will have to wait to hear from them.

Sherri, have you heard any more (further) from the hospitals you contacted?

Posted by: juleni at April 22, 2005 8:08 PM

Unrelated story...

Pinellas county is back in the news, this time for handcuffing a 5 year old girl!!! What is going on in America??

Posted by: sujata at April 22, 2005 9:50 PM

I wrote to Sean Hannity, Michael Medved, Laura Ingraham, Hugh Hewitt, and Dennis Prager, asking them to make a stink about this on their shows. I also wrote to National Right to Life, asking them to do something so that their state affiliates will follow suit. I wrote to LifeNews.com so hopefully he can do something. We have to do SOMETHING. We can't sit idly by and watch this happen.

Posted by: Jen at April 23, 2005 12:12 AM

I'm probably missing some stuff out, but here's a list of British press and TV. All of them will have covered Charlotte's case, but since we're in the middle of a General Election here, it probably wouldn't hurt to nudge them a little:

The Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk
Conservative, up-market, Mark Steyn writes for them

The Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/0,6961,,00.html
Very left-of-centre, ran that embarrassing, anti-Bush letter-writing campaign during the U.S. election

The Daily Mail: http://www.dailymail.co.uk
Very, very Conservative/conservative. They're actually working with the Wyatts, so they'll be the most sympathetic

The Daily Express: http://www.express.co.uk/
Conservative, usually on the right side of things ethically

The Sun: http://www.thesun.co.uk/
Blairite New Labour, tabloid. Largest circulation in Britain by far, but fairly to the centre politically. Not socialist like the Guardian or Indie

The Times: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/section/0,,2086,00.html
Intelligent, but a little left-leaning on some stuff

The Daily Mirror: http://www.mirror.co.uk/
Centre-left, working-class tabloid, sort of The Sun's evil twin

The Independent: http://www.independent.co.uk/
Very, very, very left-wing. This is where you go if The Guardian isn't radical enough. Robert 'I'd have beaten me up' Fisk writes for them. Need I say more?

ITN News: http://www.itn.co.uk/
U.K.'s biggest rival to the BBC. Fairly straightforward news coverage, but with a heavier human interest angle than the BBC, and not so left-wing

Channel Four News: http://www.itn.co.uk/channel4news/index.shtml
Produced by ITN, but very left-leaning, sort of a televised Guardian

If I think of anywhere else, I'll update.

Posted by: RottyPup at April 23, 2005 8:16 AM

Okay, Julie that might be the answer then-at least for right now. That is a good (and plausible) angle to work. How much money would the equipment cost and where to find a philanthropist willing to donate? It can be done.

Posted by: alwayschooselife at April 23, 2005 12:21 PM

RottyPup - thanks for the press/TV leads: I'll be contacting them.

Alwayschooselife - Well, I am wondering myself how much money is needed, and am waiting to hear.

RottyPup - as Debbie and Darren said that they would care for Charlotte at home if they had the right equipment, "but that takes money", they advised, could you or anyone find out what kind of equipment and just how much money might be needed?

I have looked into Paypal as an option for collections, and it is possible. We just need a website, with a Paypal 'donate' button put on the site. I would be glad to set up the Paypal account for it, and we could have the account connect to a bank in the UK for Charlotte's parents. Or, since Charlotte already has a website/blogsite established for her, I should contact the folks there, and see if they would like to pursue using a Paypal button on their website to collect donations for the parents. the finances collected could also be used for travel if they had the opportunity to take Charlotte to another hospital for help. OK, that is what I've gotta look into now.

Posted by: juleni at April 23, 2005 11:43 PM

Sujata - that little 5 year old girl who was handcuffed by police - was in Pinellas county, Florida where Terri S. was?! Somehow I had missed where that occurred!!

Posted by: juleni at April 23, 2005 11:44 PM

I will post this here and also in the articles above. Here is the most current request that I have received from Hannah, for Charlotte!!:

"Darren & Debbie are asking if it would be at all possible to bring in a
pro-life doctor from elsewhere, with some knowledge in this field, to do
an independent assessment on Charlotte. Would you know of any leads, or
how we might go about this? They feel strongly that the NHS is not
working for her best interest, and just now it seems as if maybe an
American doctor might be able to make a less politicized assesment than a
British doctor.

-Hannah"

Posted by: juleni at April 25, 2005 10:43 AM