[inopinatus]

No. The Charlie Gard case is an horrific example of how easily grief and desperation are exploited with false hope.

Your corruption of the facts - the UK's government has not "decided he should die" - is an echo of that exploitation.

It is the same construct that leads the unwell to adopt dangerous or ineffective remedies from quacks and snake oil merchants, only in this case it is being leveraged by political and religious groups to further their own agenda.

[TheGirondin]

No. Real hospitals in the US and in Italy have offered to treat him, but the UK has indeed decided he should die and preventing the parents from bringing him to those hospitals.

[inopinatus]

No. You have moved beyond emotive mis-statement into lying. You are repeating propaganda. The Italian proposal is a bad joke. It is a Vatican hospital with no experience in this field, with no hope of offering any treatment, and is simply grandstanding on behalf of the Pope. As things stand, the UK has not "decided he should die". The UK High Court and Supreme Courts - not government - accepted that he is dying, and that any attempt to prolong life would be cruel. The US hospital proposal may be serious and is under consideration by UK courts, but it too has nevertheless been hijacked by uncomprehending US politicians.

In all this I feel mostly for the parents. Their pain and desperation has been used by cynical opportunists for column inches, and that is just revolting.

[DanBC]

At least one of those hospitals withdrew support after seeing brain scans which show massive brain damage.

And it's not the government, it's the courts who are independent of the government. One of the courts was outside the UK.

In the UK courts the case was between the parents and the hospital. In the European court the case was between the parents and the UK.

Read this for more: http://www.transparencyproject.org.uk/charlie-gard-update/