The case is not about the right to withdraw life-sustaining medical treatment. Link to my previous article.
Victoria Hospital (London Health Sciences Centre) and the family agree that Joseph is dying. The family wants a tracheotomy to be done to allow Joseph to be brought home where he would die in the care of his family.
We must be clear, this is not a case of euthanasia but rather a case of who has the right to decide to make end-of-life decisions.
I really can't understand why the court denied the family the opportunity to bring their child home to allow him to die in their care. I also can't understand why Victoria Hospital in London Ontario would be so heartless as to force this family, who are grieving, to go through the emotional and financial stress of going through the courts in order to be allowed to take their terminally ill child home to die in their arms?
I can't understand how the court would think that "justice" has been done, when a hospital has employed a high priced legal team to fight against a family who are relying on legal aid to defend their rights. This is not only a case of David vs Goliath, but in this case, the court is the second Goliath.
Finally, the decision may have been acceptable, if the Judge had decided that, if another physician was willing to do the tracheotomy, that then it should be done. The reality is that you cannot force a doctor to do a tracheotomy against their conscience.
Once again, if it becomes accepted that decisions by a hospital or medical team supersede that of the power of attorney, then everyone needs to be concerned.
The article stated:
Baby's breathing tube to be removed Monday
A Superior Court judge in London has dismissed a Windsor couple’s appeal of a decision to have their dying baby’s breathing tube removed in hospital instead of allowing the child to spend his last days at home.
Moe Maraachli and Sana Nader took their battle with London doctors to court in hopes their one-year-old son Joseph, who has a severe neurological condition, would be able to die at home, surrounded by family.
The couple appealed a Jan. 26 ruling by the Consent and Capacity Board of Ontario, an independent body that deals with matters under the Health Care Consent Act, which sided with the doctors, agreeing that Joseph’s breathing tube should be removed.
An emotional Justice Helen Rady said Thursday the board’s decision was reasonable, tearing up as she delivered her decision about an hour after the lawyers made their arguments in court.
Joseph’s breathing tube is to be removed by 10 a.m. Monday.
“I do my best for my baby. My son is not a criminal ... to just let him die,” Moe Maraachli said through tears outside the courtroom. “They are taking my baby away from me.”
Maraachli said he didn’t know how he will tell his wife Sana, who was too upset to sit through the day’s court proceedings, about the judge’s decision. He couldn’t think about how he would explain the situation to the couple’s older child, seven-year-old Ali.
Maraachli and Nader lost a daughter nine years ago to a condition nearly identical to Joseph’s.
Joseph has been at London’s Victoria Hospital since October, suffering from severe and progressively deteriorating neurological problems.
His brain is losing function and he can’t breathe on his own or swallow.
After a battery of tests and various examinations, specialists in London concluded that Joseph has no prospect of recovery and is in a persistent vegetative state.
But Joseph’s parents insisted the baby responds to their voices and touch and has been growing over the course of his hospital stay. They wanted doctors to perform a tracheotomy — opening a direct airway through an incision in the trachea — and let them take Joseph home to die.
Doctors refused to perform the procedure because it’s too risky.
The craziest quote in the article is the final quote
Doctors refused to perform the procedure (tracheotomy) because it's too risky.
Why is it too risky, the child is supposedly dying anyway, and after they remove the breathing tube, the child will supposedly die anyway. So what's at issue?
I am convinced that this case is really about deciding who has the power to make end-of-life decisions. The court aooears to be suggesting that the Hospital and the doctors have the power to make end-of-life decisions, even when it is against the reasonable wishes of the family. If this is the case, then the people of Ontario better be ready, because this is worse than supposed death panels.