The Charlie Gard case: British and American approaches to court resolution of disputes over medical decisions

INTRODUCTION On 8 June 2017, the Supreme Court in the United Kingdom rejected a legal appeal in the high-profile case of Charlie Gard, a British infant with a severe genetic disorder whose parents had disagreed with medical professionals and were requesting treatment that the doctors believed was futile. The case was the latest in a series of UK legal cases where courts have authorized withdrawal of treatment against the wishes of parents. In such disputes, British judges have, with rare exception, sided with health professionals. In contrast, in North America when disputes have reached the court, the courts have invariably sided in favor of lifesustaining medical treatment requested by a loving family. In the United Kingdom and United States such disagreements are generally resolved in discussions between the family and the doctors with, if necessary, the assistance of a hospital ethics committee. If the conflict proves intractable, one of the parties might seek a court order in support of its position.