don’t give up on me!
"You see, the hospital gave up on her, we didn't. We carried on fighting for justice and she has proved the hospital wrong by showing all the things what they said she can't do--and is doing them. We will continue to fight for her all the way as we believe that under any circumstances you don't judge on an innocent childs life ."
--Darren Wyatt (Charlotte's Dad)
We’ve been told that Charlotte will go into foster care in two weeks, in a place outside of Portsmouth– neither Debbie nor Darren will be told where. Please pray that God would watch over her wherever she is, even if she is out of our reach. And we want so much for him to intervene in this situation– please pray that he would do so if it is his will.
15 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
OMG how can they take her away from her parents like this?
She needs her mummy and daddy even if she is in foster care for a season.
Dont be afraid, look at all the miracles that God has done for Charlotte so far. Im praying for her and for the situation.
Keep fighting, its not time to give up, she is your baby.
Comment by Claire — 7 December, 2006 @ 11:02 pm
Will they be told anything about what happens to her, or will they be left forever wondering if she’s dead or alive?
This is terrible. At least they could have given her parents visitation privileges.
Comment by Lydia — 8 December, 2006 @ 1:12 am
They say he’ll be able to see her sometimes– but probably infrequently– at a “contact center”. We don’t really know anything more, and it’s hard to be hopeful right now.
Comment by Hannah — 8 December, 2006 @ 1:21 am
I am so, so sorry. You must be completely devastated. My prayers are with you all.
Comment by Kathryn — 8 December, 2006 @ 4:09 pm
They will be using a contact centre for many reasons - the safety/privacy of the foster parents, everyone’s protection against false allegations, maybe protecting Darren and hopefully Debbie too against the pain of seeing Charlotte only in another family’s home, and most importantly because it will give Charlotte a place and situation that she knows means she will see her Daddy. It’s an environmental cue, if you like, and they’re incredibly useful to profoundly impaired children like our Charlotte.
I am terribly terribly sorry that Charlotte’s contact with Darren will be (it sounds like) so limited, BUT we should be pleased pleased pleased pleased pleased that she is FINALLY leaving hospital, being taken home - to any home - to love and warmth and protection, to the rest of her life, as fit and well as she’s ever been.
Maybe it’s sensible that the issue of getting Charlotte out of hospital and the one of sorting her own family out to parent her are seperated into 2 - it will not be poorly Darren or stressed Debbie who first discover the pitfalls of having a ‘medically-dependant’ child home, it will be a foster parent, anonymous to the media and hopefully anonymous to the hospital too.
All the very best, Charlotte. Enjoy the beginning of the rest of your life.
Comment by Rebecca — 8 December, 2006 @ 11:31 pm
Rebecca, I’m sorry, but I think you’re naive.
My only hope is that Charlotte remains relatively healthy (for her) and that the doctors don’t have any greater level of withdrawal of care that they want to initiate when they have no one watching. _So far_ the only thing they’ve asked for is the DNR, and that’s ended up being moot because Charlotte (bless her!) hasn’t needed resuscitation since that all began. They’ve been willing to give her the antibiotics, the oxygen, and, esp., the artificially delivered nutrition and hydration that she needs. But we still hear about cost, cost, cost. I’m not saying there is (necessarily) a “plot” here. What I am saying is that, once no one can report what is going on to the world on the Internet, once there are no parents to object in court and put them to the trouble of getting Judge Hedley to approve withdrawal of care, once the state has complete wardship without even the minimal oversight afforded by people watching who desperately want Charlotte to live, it may be all too easy for them not to give her what she needs next time she gets sick.
Comment by Lydia — 9 December, 2006 @ 2:35 pm
Lydia - Charlotte will be living with foster parents, people who chose to have her come and live with them. She is a ward of the court, yes, but she has and will always have a right to the same independant advocacy that she’s already been receiving; moving into the care of foster parents will not change that.
Oxygen and feeding formula are cheap. They are common to the point of being trivial in the care afforded to profoundly disabled children in this country. I know maybe a couple of dozen families with similarly impaired kiddies with the same kind of needs. Crucially, they are much, MUCH cheaper than the kind of court case that would ensue if anyone wanted to withhold them from a conscious child. It creates enough of a stink when they want to withdraw that kind of care from someone in a persistant vegetative state - half a step up from a coma - in the UK even that has only happened a handful of times.
I hope there won’t be a next time.
Comment by Rebecca — 9 December, 2006 @ 9:33 pm
Yes, they have just decided to withhold them from a PVS woman in the UK very recently. Wesley Smith blogged it.
And I do know that there seems to be some resistance to such withholding in the UK. In fact, I’ve revised a previous opinion to thinking there there’s more of a resistance to it in the UK than in the US, which is good (for kids like Charlotte in the UK, that is).
But I still believe that you’re assuming too easily that Charlotte would get the same advocacy in the foster care situation. Sure, she’s _entitled_ to it, but are there people involved there motivated to _be_ those advocates? The mere fact that the foster parents have agreed to have her doesn’t mean that they take a strong advocacy view towards her care. Far to the contrary, you can be sure that social services did not choose foster parents who would be as much of a nuisance to the medical people as Darren has been. Yet that is because he isn’t willing passively to accept that “doctor knows best.” And that willingness to think independently is the essence of a good patient advocate.
I believe that this case has been all about control, from the beginning. There is an air of outrage from the medical establishment there in the UK (I’ve seen it in this and in other cases) when someone says they want more care for their child than the doctors think advisable. How _dare_ you imply that we aren’t always making the best decisions? Recall that this very web site is illegal, that there has recently been a court order put out restricting information about Charlotte. What the state clearly wants there is for no one to be looking over their shoulder in Charlotte’s case. Now, to be clear: I’m _not_ saying that this means that they have some dark, evil purpose. I certainly hope they don’t. What I _am_ saying is that they have taken from the beginning a much more hopeless and “give-it-up” attitude toward her than Darren, that they have been extremely annoyed by his advocacy for her, and that they want him and everybody else to *butt out* so they can do whatever they think best for the rest of her life without being bugged about it.
Whether this “whatever they think best” will in fact _be_ best for her or not is not obvious. For example, consider the case of David Glass. (I can look up the link later, if you’re interested.) He’s a disabled boy who had beaten the odds and survived to age 12, after doctors from his birth had been saying he was imminently going to die. At age 12 he got sick with bronchitis or pneumonia, something like that, and was taken to the hospital. They initiated a major-dose diamorphine drip, told his mother he was dying and she should “let nature take its course,” and very nearly killed him with the drip–he was turning blue and going into a coma–when his relatives (aunts and uncles, I believe) forcibly disconnected him. His mother was allowed to take him home. (I bet she wished she’d never brought him to the hospital in the first place!) The relatives who had saved his life were sternly lectured by a judge and did some jail time!
Could something like this happen to Charlotte, without the intervening relatives, in the case of a later illness after she’s in foster care? It certainly isn’t beyond the realm of possibility. And you certainly shouldn’t assume that the foster parents would be the kind of assertive advocates that her own parents have been and would be to prevent this or less dramatic forms of “giving up” leading, perhaps indirectly, to her death.
Comment by Lydia — 9 December, 2006 @ 9:46 pm
Perhaps it would help your audience to understand what is happening if you could please explain the reasons social services are giving for not allowing Charlotte to be looked after by Darren. Why do they say he can’t look after his baby?
Comment by Stefan — 10 December, 2006 @ 12:20 pm
Lydia,
could you do provide that link to the 12-year old boy’s case you mentioned you could look up if anyone was interested?
And, like Stefan above, I’d also like to know the reasons they’re giving for not allowing Darren to look after his own baby?
And my prayers are with Charlotte, of course.
Comment by alien — 11 December, 2006 @ 7:47 am
Here it is:
http://www.spuc.org.uk/about/no-less-human/THE_CASE_OF_DAVID_GLASS_WV.pdf
I’m in the U.S. myself and following Charlotte’s case from the internet. My understanding is that it is because of Darren’s suicide attempt by overdose after the breakup of the marriage (this was some time ago) that social services says he is unfit. I don’t know enough about social services law in the UK to know to what extent they have to defend this decision or whether a lawyer could help him to retain his parental rights.
Comment by Lydia — 11 December, 2006 @ 2:26 pm
I will never understand how any court of law can dare to think they have the right to determine one’s worthiness to live. God granted us life and only He can determine when that life must end. I have and will continue to keep your family & your dear Charlotte in my prayers.The stress upon you must be nearly beyond endurance and my heart aches for you. Know that many many people are thinking of you, fighting for you and praying for you.
May God bless you & care for you all…
Love Moonshadow
Comment by Moonshadow — 12 December, 2006 @ 10:11 am
I echo Moonshadows words. You are all in my thoughts and have been for over 2 years. Darling Charlotte fills my heart. I beleive you are all doing Gods best work, fighting so harfd for Charlottes basic human rights. She is in the most vulnerable of world population and you are giving her a voice. Bless you all. I hope knowing this offers up strength to you all as you endure this ongoing painful journey. You are all in my prayers. Cheryl
Comment by Cheryl Hamden, Adelaide, Australia — 12 December, 2006 @ 11:03 am
I am so amazed at how Charlotte has pulled through all her infections, etc ever since the first DNR was ordered, and it just shows how much of a fight she is putting up. I really hope that she has a better quality of life being out of hospital with a foster family. I hope she gets the love and attention she needs.
If god thinks it is time for Charlotte to go with the angels and to rest in peace with no pain, etc then he will let her go. By the courts removing a DNR they are actually going against god.
Comment by Kat — 13 December, 2006 @ 3:02 pm
In answer to the question posed by some bloggers above, I am a family lawyer with some experience of care work in the UK, though I haven’t been involved in this case.
The decision to foster Charlotte will have been taken at Court following a hearing or hearings at which the interests of the parents will have been represented. In these cases the child’s interests are often represented independently by a “guardian ad litem” who is generally not a lawyer and whose sole job is to speak up for the child.
Mr & Mrs Wyatt will have been automatically entitled to legal representation without cost and I’ve no doubt that their case was put vigorously, as it has been throughout - I can say at least that much from my own experience because I’ve read the Court transcripts and I can see how hard the family lawyer fought for them.
Comment by Burkoff — 4 January, 2007 @ 4:00 pm