Freckelton Ian
Barrister, Crockett Chambers.
Justice, Supreme Court of Nauru.
J Law Med. 2017 Nov;25(1):7-29.
Decision-making about seriously ill and dying children is fraught and distressing for all concerned. The United Kingdom saga involving Charlie Gard and the ruling by four courts hat in his best interests he should not receive experimental therapy overseas provides many lessons for how such controversies should and should not be handled. This editorial places the case in historical and legal context and traces the evolution of the disputation about the treatment to be provided to Charlie, including through the courts and in the media. It argues that it is important for all concerned, including for confidence in clinical guidance and decision-making, that systems be generated which minimise the risk of cases such as that involving Charlie Gard being handled so publicly and in so adversarial a way.
对于身患重病和濒临死亡的儿童进行决策，让所有相关人员都感到棘手和痛苦。英国涉及查理·加德的事件以及四个法院做出的关于从其最佳利益出发他不应在海外接受实验性治疗的裁决，为处理此类争议应如何做及不应如何做提供了许多经验教训。这篇社论将该事件置于历史和法律背景中，并追溯了关于应给予查理何种治疗的争议的演变过程，包括在法庭和媒体上的情况。它认为，对于所有相关人员而言，包括对于临床指导和决策的信心来说，建立相关制度以尽量减少类似查理·加德这样的案件被如此公开且以对抗性方式处理的风险是很重要的。
