Charlie Gard: Appeal judges rule life support should be withdrawn from sick baby

Appeal judges have ruled that doctors can withdraw life-support treatment from sick baby Charlie Gard.

Chris Gard and Connie Yates want their nine-month-old son Charlie, who suffers from a rare genetic condition and has brain damage, to undergo a therapy trial in the United States.

But specialists at Great Ormond Street Hospital in London, where Charlie is being cared for, said the therapy is experimental and will not help. They argued that life-support treatment should stop.

In the High Court last month, Mr Justice Francis concluded that life-support treatment should end and said Charlie should be allowed die with dignity

Charlie's parents, who are in their 30s and come from Bedfont, west London, had asked three Court of Appeal judges to overturn Mr Justice Francis's decision.

But Lord Justice McFarlane, Lady Justice King and Lord Justice Sales, who analysed evidence at a Court of Appeal hearing in London on Tuesday, have upheld the ruling.

Mr Justice Francis had concluded that a move to a palliative care regime would be in Charlie's best interests.

He said he had made the decision with the "heaviest of hearts" but with "complete conviction" for Charlie's best interests.

Richard Gordon QC, who led Charlie's parents' legal team, told appeal judges that the case raised "very serious legal issues".

"They wish to exhaust all possible options," Mr Gordon said in a written outline of Charlie's parents' case.

"They don't want to look back and think 'what if?'. This court should not stand in the way of their only remaining hope."

Mr Gordon suggested that Charlie might be being unlawfully detained and denied his right to liberty.

He said judges should not interfere with parents' exercise of parental rights and added: "What is really at stake in this case is the State, on a massive scale, intruding in your right to private and family life."

Lawyers, who represented Charlie's parents for free, said Mr Justice Francis had not given enough weight to Charlie's human right to life.

They said there was no risk that the proposed therapy in the US would cause Charlie "significant harm".

Mr Gard shook his head as appeal judges announced their decision. Charlie's parents then left court to hold discussions with lawyers.