This child's parents, however, had hope for a medical solution if not now, then in the future. I know that Britain has pulled the plug on children before, but in this case, the Italian government had stepped up and said that they would make the child an Italian citizen and take responsibility for her care at Vatican medical facilities in Rome.
I'm not sure what British law, or what thoughts the judge was thinking, that would not simply have them say, "okay then", and let the child go to Italy. This just seems wrong, regardless of your views regarding artificial life support.
I had to read through several articles to find some comments on what the Judge was thinking and answer that question.
Per quotes in The Guardian and BBC The battle was that the specialists in mitochondrial disease were saying that she was dying, had brain damage, and most importantly that the treatments being used were causeing her pain. The parent's disagreeed. So the courts were convinced that moving to Italy and further treatment were not in the baby's best interests because they were both futile and painful, and she would be suffering a protracted suffering death.
I honestly don't know enough about mitochondrial disease to have an informed opinion on this. Big government and centralized health care demonstrably DO have "death panels" and remove care earlier than might otherwise be done, as well as ration care. On the other side, some parents also demonstrably do make decisions that harm or cause pain to kids for their own reasons, even with good intentions.
It's not remotely the same thing, but one of my cats is currently in the process of dying slowly, and the wife and I routinely look at him, watch for suffering, and try to make a judgment call about if he's happy, or suffering, and if it's time or not. Considering the emotional toll that takes for a cat, I can't imagine someone being clear-eyed about that with their child.
Either way, it's tragic this kid got this desease, and I hope she found some measure of peace in what comes next.