20176128322211/22218Systems of justiceSummarise the case briefly. Identify the interpretive issues in the case, indicating the reason for interpretation.Charlie Gard was a young child with a lifelong illness called mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome which is a very rare genetic disorder that causes progressive brain damage and muscle failure. This case becomes extensive due to the disagreements between charlie’s parents and the hospital, therefore, the courts had to get involved to help make a decision regarding Charlie’s best interests. Charlie was unable to breathe on his own, he was deaf and had epilepsy disorder, his heart, liver, and kidneys were also affected. Because of the muscle failure, Charlie was unable to move his arms and legs unaided.How has the judge/judges interpreted these issues? Explain.The issues are that Charlie had a rare disorder that couldn’t be cured, it was believed that there was treatment but there wasn’t, all that could be done was a trial that could have helped or it could have caused more problems. The parent’s had the rights to choose what is best for their child but under the children’s act 1989 section 31a says that when an application is made for a care order to protect the child, the local authority has to prepare a plan for the future care of the child in a given time set by the courts. Charlie is unable to consent to medical treatment due to his lack of capacity therefore the parents would decide but because of the hostile situation between the hospitals decisions and Charlie’s parents, Justice Francis was guided by the ‘intellectual milestones’ set by the court of appeal in Wyatt v Portsmouth NHS Trust 2000 1 FLR 554. The other issues is that is Charlie unable to function without the aid of the life support machine it was in the child’s best interests for the court to let Charlie die.How should the judge/s have interpreted the issues?