Charlie Gard and Alfie Evans : state-sanctioned euthanasia?

Abstract

The cases of Charlie Gard and Alfie Evans, although similar, were taken to court for different reasons. Charlie’s parents applied to Court intending to get permission to allow the child to travel abroad for experimental treatment, whilst Alfie’s parents sought permission to allow the child to travel abroad for comfort of care. The main purpose of this small-scale research study is to examine in depth the cases of Charlie Gard and Alfie Evans and analyse the rights of the different individuals involved in these cases. The objectives of such a study aimed at achieving more knowledge on the Best Interests Standard and the different rights of the health professionals and the parents in cases of conflict on the plan of treatment for a child. A semi-structured interview schedule, designed by the researcher of the study, was used as a research tool, to conduct interviews with four paediatricians working in a private sector or at the local general hospital. Interviews were recorded and transcribed using thematic data analysis as explained by Richard and Morse. Three themes emerged from the qualitative data including, the cases, the rights of the health professionals, and the rights of the parents. Results showed that all health professionals emphasized the importance of good communication with the families of the children involved, while also claiming that parents should be the ultimate decisionmakers in their child’s plan of care. All paediatricians participating in this study believed that the sentences were just as treatment was, in fact, futile and these children were suffering as also stated by the Best Interests Standard. Furthermore, all participants believed that referring to the media was not ideal as these cases were sensitive and ought to have remained private. Given these findings, the author believes that with better communication between the parents and the health professionals, a better outcome could have resulted. In cases where a decision cannot be reached, the health professionals and the parents should meet with an external mediator to decide upon a better plan of care for the child. The court should always be left as a last resort.