Little Marwa, still in a coma, will continue to receive care. The Administrative Court of Marseille ruled on Wednesday.
This is a new twist in the case of little Marwa. The Administrative Court of Marseille has just rendered its decision concerning the cessation of care administered to the one-year-old girl, still in an artificial coma. And justice has ruled against the opinion of doctors by ordering in summary the continuation of care, indicates this Wednesday evening Agence France-Presse.
“It’s a victory for the right to life against what would have been a death sentence for little Marwa. Despite the irreversible state and loss of autonomy in which we may find ourselves, nothing justifies stopping care as long as there is hope ”, welcomed the family lawyer, Samia Maktouf, whose the comments are reported by AFP.
Last January, the lawyer of the Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Marseille (AP-HM), Me Olivier Grimaldi, had declared about a decision favorable to the continuation of the care: “it will be a human decision that the AP-HM will understand ”, stressing however that it would then be necessary to“ requisition ”the doctors whose“ oath and proper and personal ethics ”are opposed to carrying out new medical acts for this girl.
Give him a chance …
In November 2016, doctors from the Timone hospital (Marseille) had decided, after a long procedure, to stop the treatments and to disconnect the respiratory system that keeps the girl alive, suffering from irreversible lesions. . But Marwa’s parents had requested that the doctors continue treatment. “We must give him the chance to live,” had declared before the administrative court of Marseille, the father of the girl, Mohamed Bouchenafa, originally from Nice. “When I look at her, you can see that she wants to live. It is not a child who wants to leave, ”he continued.
Facebook petition
As a reminder, the parents, who share their fight on Facebook, had seized the administrative justice in summary, and the judges had ordered an expertise on the state of Marwa, before deciding. At the beginning of January, she concluded that there were “irreversible sequelae” and a “major handicap”, but did not resolve the “ethical dilemma” of continuing treatment. She also warned about the difficulty of assessing the pain felt by the baby, if he was kept alive.
.
