Seems to me that on balance, the doctors here are trying their damndest to pursue Charlie's best interests - I'm happy to believe that, as the alternative (that they're trying to deprive a child of his life) is an abomination. I'm happy to believe that they see transporting Charlie to the US for a treatment by methods in which they see no virtue or hope and which even the treating doctor says may well not work, as a risky process which is prejudicial to Charlie's best interests. I'm relieved and happy to see the commitment the doctors are making to secure Charlie's best interests as they see them.
I'm very unhappy and uneasy that this has entered the legal arena at all. Because of the Twin Tools of Mob Rule - Facebook and Twitter - the hard of thinking, the snowflakes, and the unprincipled have made their usual split-second agreement with the mob and concluded that the NHS, the doctors and the judges are authoritarian bastards who are only interested in covering their own backs because they can't cure Charlie but a guy in the States says he can. This whole process brings medicine, doctors and judges into disrepute by their being drawn into it. As a population we really, really don't need that, and we certainly don't need badly thought out legal decisions made in a political arena.
If the parents want to take him to the US for a probably hopeless treatment which might harm and has a low probability of doing any good, then if they can square it with their consciences, they should go with the blessings of us all. That way disrepute is minimised, knowledge might be gained and who knows? Maybe Charlie gets fixed.