It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
London, England (CNN) -- A severely ill toddler at the center of a legal battle between his parents has died days after his father agreed to switch off his ventilator.
The 13-month-old boy, known as Baby RB, suffered from congenital myasthenic syndrome, a rare genetic condition that means he cannot breathe on his own.
Cristopher Cuddihee, a solicitor who represents the father, confirmed the baby's death early Sunday but did not provide any more details.
The baby's father had been battling his mother and the hospital in London's High Court because they wanted the child's life support switched off "in his best interests." He disagreed, saying the baby could play and recognize his parents. The father withdrew his objection Tuesday and allowed the ventilator to be switched off.
The hospital defended its stance in a statement last week, saying the baby's birth defect "causes severe muscle weakness, feeding and respiratory problems, and the disease is progressive."
Baby RB's lungs filled with fluid every few hours, giving him the sensation he is choking and causing the child to suffer, lawyers representing the hospital said in court November 2.
Ultimately, the father agreed with the mother and the hospital that the best thing was for the baby to die "in a planned way, with the administration of a large dose of sedative, the removal of the ventilation tube and his consequent death," Judge Andrew McFarlane said Tuesday.
The baby's parents, who are separated, cannot be named because of a court order protecting their privacy.
Originally posted by Argyll
Euthanasia is the wrong term.
The court case was about removing care for the poor child, the sedatives were administered to relieve his suffering as he died, not to actuall bring about his death.
A truly tragic story.
Here is an interview with his mother.
eu·tha·na·sia (yo̵̅o̅′t̸hə nā′z̸hə, -z̸hē ə, -zē ə)
Now Rare an easy and painless death
act or practice of causing death painlessly, so as to end suffering: advocated by some as a way to deal with persons dying of incurable, painful diseases
Originally posted by Applesandoranges
Why do the people who administer the drugs because of the consent of another person think they are not murderer's?
Thats like the government bringing in a law to say ok everyone we give you consent to kill eachother but it still ends up as murder.
Just because the person thinks its the right thing to do does not make it right and is still murder.
I wonder what emotions not just for the family and the person who got ill but the person who administers their death.
The doctor who does abortion is still a murderer.
This is just my deep thoughts on this. Your profession wont save you from being a murderer.
The deep impact of giving professionals the green light can actually cause a severe and dangerous implication for the whole human race. If we give our consent to 1 or 2 different consensual murder scenarios then we are agreeing infact to the depopulation of humans.