I agree with JQ.
I was torn on this one, starting from the viewpoint that the doctors were in reality claiming that the State owns your children and can make decisions about them on your behalf, with no challenge possible.
Then I read an article in which the US doctor who will (?
provide the treatment was reported as having said that it "might" work; that it's not a cure but that he "hoped" it might be possible to achieve an improvement in Charlie's condition. By improvement, he seems to mean that the child will have some sense of awareness about what's going on around him but in no sense will he ever lead anything approaching a normal life.
I've been fortunate never to have been in Charlie's parents' position so I have no real clue how they feel other than to say it's easy to see they'd want to fight for their child - but I've an uneasy feeling that this is no more than a doctor wanting to try out some thoughts on a real live human. An experiment; but then, all medicine is experimental at some stage. /..cont (ran into word limit)