Charlie Gard's parents to find out where he will end his life
Charlie Gard's parents will learn today whether the terminally-ill baby can spend his final days at home.
Connie Yates and Chris Gard, Charlie's mother and father, have been warned that the prospect of the youngster being allowed to die there is unlikely.
Ms Yates was back at the High Court on Wednesday - two days after she and Mr Gard abandoned legal action seeking continued treatment for the youngster - as the couple became embroiled in their latest battle with Great Ormond Street (GOSH).
GOSH argued that practical problems existed around caring for Charlie at home.
And lawyers representing the children's hospital said Charlie's parents had put forward no clear plan, offering instead a hospice alternative.
Charlie's parents' lawyer accused Great Ormond Street of putting obstacles in the couple's way, saying the pair wished for a "few days of tranquillity outside of a hospital setting".
Mr Justice Francis, sitting at London's High Court, said he would make a decision on whether Charlie could die at home on Wednesday - but warned the likelihood was "small".
On Monday, Charlie's parents announced they were giving up a legal fight to get continued medical treatment for their son, who suffers from mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome.
But less than 24 hours later, Ms Yates found herself back in court as complications emerged over whether Charlie would be able to die at the family's west London home.
Barrister Kate Gollop QC, representing Great Ormond Street, said practicalities were of the "greatest importance" but Charlie's parents had proposed no clear plan and refused the offer of mediation.
She said bosses wanted to fulfil Charlie's parents' "last desire", however medics wanted to avoid hazards or mishaps, and ensure the tot was safe.
"The care plan must be safe, it must spare Charlie all pain and protect his dignity," said Ms Gollop.
ITV News Correspondent Rebecca Barry, who was in court, said one of the main practical considerations had been "invasive ventilation" that Charlie required.
Ms Gollop said: "At the same time, the plan must honour his parents' wishes about two matters in particular, namely the time and place of his passing."
She added that finalising an end-of-life care plan was the "most delicate and difficult task".
Grant Armstrong, representing Mr Gard and Ms Yates, said: "The parents wish for a few days of tranquillity outside of a hospital setting.
"The parents had hoped that Great Ormond Street would work with them."
He added: "The parents' primary position is that Charlie's final days of palliative care ... should take place at the family home."
The judge said the dispute cried out for a settlement. He warned that if a solution could not be agreed then he would decide on Wednesday.
KEY MOMENTS IN CHARLIE GARD'S LIFE
August 4, 2016 - Charlie is born a "perfectly healthy" baby at full term and at a "healthy weight".
September 2016 - Doctors discover that he has a rare inherited disease - infantile onset encephalomyopathy mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome (MDDS).
October 2016 - Charlie is transferred to the Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London
March 3, 2017 - Great Ormond Street bosses ask Mr Justice Francis to rule that life-support treatment should stop.
April 11 - Mr Justice Francis says doctors can stop providing life-support treatment
May 23 - Three Court of Appeal judges analyse the case and dismiss Charlie's parents appeal
June 8 - Charlie's parents lose fight in the Supreme Court
June 27 - European court judges refuse to intervene
July 10 - Charlie's parents return to the High Court and ask Mr Justice Francis to carry out a fresh analysis of the case. Mr Justice Francis says he will consider any new evidence
July 24 - Charlie's parents announce their decision to end their legal fight
In recent weeks, US President Donald Trump and the Pope both personally intervened in the case to offer US and Vatican medical options.
And a US doctor offering to treat Charlie also became embroiled in legal discussions, with accusations he stood to gain financially from the treatment. Dr Michio Hirano denied this on Thursday, saying he had "no financial interest" in the case.
Concluding their five-month legal battle on Monday, Mr Gard, speaking outside the High Court, said that lots of time had been "wasted" on legalities when specialist treatment for Charlie could have been sought.
"Had Charlie been given the treatment sooner, he would have had the potential to be a normal, healthy little boy," Mr Gard told reporters.
In an emotional statement, he said "We will let our son go and be with the angels,
"We all have to live with the 'what-ifs' which will haunt us for the rest of our lives.
"Our son is an absolute warrior and we could not be prouder of him and we will miss him terribly."
The couple had already lost their case in the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court when they eventually terminated legal proceedings.