THE DAD of a brain-damaged tot has slammed doctors as High Court upheld its decision to switch off life support.
The parents of Isaiah lashed out after losing their appeal to keep their one-year-old son alive.
His mother Takesha Thomas and father Lanre Haastrup, both 36, launched a Charlie Gard-style legal fight to continue his life-support system and were appealing against the High Court decision last month.
Judges had argued that giving further intensive care treatment to little Isaiah was “futile, burdensome and not in his best interests”.
Speaking outside High Court today, Mr Haastrup, Peckham, South East London, blasted doctors for their treatment.
“We are happy that we are fighting for our son who was negligently harmed,” said the distraught father.
“I think the doctors should be ashamed of how they have treated him.
“How can you ban me from seeing my son, despite having a judgement in there to kill him?
“It is really sad, it is a sad day.”
Mr Haastrup added that they might lose their son “within three days” as he vowed to go to the European Court of Human Rights to appeal the decision.
“I’ll quickly go home to see what I can do to stay that – they should wait, and see what we do next.
“They shouldn’t rush to end his life.”
Family judge Mr Justice MacDonald said he passed his initial ruling on January 29 with “profound sadness”.
Isaiah, whose brain was starved of oxygen during birth in February last year, is “profoundly disabled” and cannot breathe for himself, the court heard at the previous ruling.
One specialist treating the tot said he was in a “low level of consciousness”, did not respond to stimulation and could not move independently.
The doctor, who cannot be named, said mum Takesha believes Isaiah does respond when she is with him.
He told the court: “She feels that Isaiah responds to her face and to her touch.
“We sought to reproduce those responses for ourselves.”
The specialist went on: “What I bring to this decision is experience of caring for children with profound brain injury.
“I would not argue that my opinion is more valuable than the mother’s.
“I bring to it a different level of training and experience.”
But Ms Thomas insisted: “When I speak to him he will respond, slowly, by opening one eye.”
“I see a child who is injured. He needs love. He needs care. I have it. I can give it,” she added.
“To say it is so poor, it is not worth living, that is not right. It is not their decision to make.”
Fiona Paterson, representing King’s, had told the judge Isaiah was “ventilator-dependent” and being cared for in a paediatric intensive care unit at the same hospital where he was born last February.
Doctors did not think there were any “further investigations or forms of treatment” which would benefit him, the barrister said.
In November Isaiah’s devastated dad Lanre was banned from the hospital after staff accused him of “threatening behaviour”.
Charlie Gard’s tragic plight touched millions around the world as his parents fought to get him more treatment for a devastating genetic illness.