Alfie Evans LIVE update: Court verdict in 24 hours as baby Alfie 'begins to struggle'

Tom Evans and Kate James are arguing against a High Court ruling yesterday, in which the judge ruled out the family’s wishes to take Alfie to a hospital in Rome for specialist treatment, following interventions from the Pope and the Italian authorities.

Three Court of Appeal judges are now hearing arguments from two barristers who are representing Alfie’s parents separately.

Both are asking the court for permission to allow their son to be transferred to Italy, where the 23-month-old was granted citizenship earlier this week.

The lawyer for Alfie’s dad has argued the toddler should not be “kept prisoner” in hospital when there are “alternative, fantastic” options for care available elsewhere.

Paul Diamond told judges: “We submit there is a likelihood of Alfie having some pleasure in life. That is beyond our knowledge.”

But Lady Justice King rejected this claim.

She said: “That is not the evidence.

“The evidence is that he is unlikely to have pain, but that tragically everything that would allow him to have some appreciation of life, or even the mere touch of his mother, has been destroyed irrevocably.”

Little Alfie was taken off life support on Monday night and was breathing unaided. His dad revealed he was required to give mouth-to-mouth resuscitation to keep his son breathing.

Today, supporters on the Alfie's Army Facebook page pleaded for ventilation equipment, and some were seen running into Alder Hey hospital with what appeared to be medical equipment in a desperate attempt to keep the baby alive.

A post on the 'Save Alfie Evans' Facebook page claimed Alder Hey wants to remove an NHS oxygen mask provided privately by doctors outside of Alder Hey but that the hospital wants to remove it as the mask doesn't belong to it and does not intend to replace it by providing an identical one.

"At the moment Alfie is ventilated with an NHS oxygen mask, which is authorised by the British national health system and therefore completely in accordance with law. 

"The mask was provided privately by doctors outside Alder Hey as the hospital does not want to provide it for obvious reasons. 

"Alder Hey has expressed the intention to want to remove it as it is not an aid belonging to the hospital itself but does not intend to replace it by giving an identical one."

Express.co.uk has contacted Alder Hey for comment. 

Before today's court hearing, Mr Evans said his son is now being given food after surviving for 36 hours without life support. 

Speaking on ITV's This Morning, he said: "Alfie is doing still as well as he can. He's fighting. He's still not suffering and hasn't had any apneas or no sign of pain.

"He's sustained his life, like any other child would, for 36 hours. Totally unexpected of him.

"I believe I am getting closer [to getting him home]. We would be happy with that.

"But we would be more blessed to get him to Italy where he needs the treatment.

"He may need a tracheotomy, he may not. But at the moment he is showing he's still fighting and he's proved all the docs wrong and all the courts wrong.

"We were told he wouldn't last five mins but now here we are 36 hours down the line."

At a High Court hearing yesterday, Mr Justice Hayden described the tot as “courageous” and a “warrior”, but said the case had now reached its “final chapter”.

The judge rejected claims from Alfie’s dad that his son was “significantly better” than first thought because he had been breathing unaided for 20 hours after doctors first withdrew his life support on Monday night.

Instead, Mr Justice Hayden said the best the child’s parents could hope for was to “explore” the options of removing him from intensive care either to a ward, a hospice or his home.

But a doctor treating Alfie, who cannot be named for legal reasons, said that for Alfie to be allowed home it would require a “sea change” in attitude from the child’s family, and they feared that in the “worst case” they would try to take the boy abroad.

Speaking to reporters outside Alder Hey Children’s Hospital in Liverpool on Tuesday night, where Alfie is being treated, Mr Evans said his 23-month-old son had defied doctors’ expectations when he continued to live after life support was withdrawn.

He said: “The court of appeal have reached out to us and said they are going to set back three judges to hear the case.

“In reality, he could be in Italy right now. We all know the military air force are ready to take him and a team of doctors are there.

“We've also got a German air ambulance team, who attempted to take him in the first place, ready... the reality is these people are eager to get him out of the country and I'm not giving up because Alfie's breathing away, he's not suffering."

Mr Evans revealed Alfie had at times needed to be helped with his breathing, adding: “At some point I had to give him mouth-to-mouth because his lips went blue and he was really fighting with his breathing so me and his mum were giving him mouth-to-mouth.”

Mariella Enoc, president of the Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital, said the facility had prepared a military plane to collect Alfie, should the courts give the go ahead.

She said: "We are ready, the plane is at Rome Ciampino Airport with the doctors on board.

“The Italian Embassy in England is also looking for an ambulance to take the boy from the hospital to the airport. The aeroplane, I repeat, is ready to take off at Ciampino, the doctors and the equipment are there, the team is ready.

"We are waiting for a response from the English justice system because even the British government can not intervene. Now I'm in Italy. We arranged all the logistical aspects with the embassy and Palazzo Chigi.

“Until the moment they tell me that everything is over, I will continue to hope, but while I hope, at the same time I think we will not make it because they do not want to.” 

Sir Andrew McFarlane, the second most senior family court judge in England and Wales will preside over the case this afternoon alongside two other Court of Appeal judges.

Sir Andrew, who sits as Lord Justice McFarlane will become the new president of the Family Division of the High Court in July, becoming the most senior family court judge in England and Wales.

During a separate three-hour hearing on Tuesday at the Family Division of the High Court in Manchester, Paul Diamond from the Christian Legal Centre suggested the alleged change in this position meant the court should consider its decision on allowing Alfie to travel abroad.

Mr Diamond handed the court a witness statement from Mr Evans in which he suggested his son’s health was “significantly better” than first thought since life support was withdrawn at 9:17pm on Monday, as he was continuing to live and breathe.

But Mr Justice Hayden said in his ruling: “The sad truth is that it is not.

“With little, indeed no hesitation, I reject that.”

Instead, the judge said Alfie’s continued life was a “shaft of "light” and a “special opportunity” for his parents to spend time with him - not the time for more legal challenges.

The judge also criticised the “malign hand” of one of the family’s advisers, law student Pavel Stroilov, who had, the court heard, been party to Mr Evans lodging a private prosecution of Alder Hey Hospital doctors, allegedly for murder.

Mr Justice Hayden said that in fact the hospital had provided “world class” care for Alfie.

"We cannot comment on the specifics of the case - only the medical team treating Alfie, and the legal team, will know the exact details and they are bound by patient confidentiality.

Following yesterday's hearing, a spokesman for Alder Hey said it was working closely with the youngster’s parents, but that its “top priority therefore remains in ensuring Alfie receives the care he deserves to ensure his comfort, dignity and privacy are maintained throughout”.

In a statement Professor Russell Viner, President of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, said decisions to withhold or withdraw treatment from a child are "not made lightly".

Mr Viner explained there is a "clear and compassionate framework" to guide practice which includes three sets of circumstances when withdrawing life-sustaining treatment may be considered. 

These are if treatment is unable or unlikely to result in the child living much longer; where treatment may prolong life but will cause the child unacceptable pain and suffering; and if an older child with a life-limiting illness repeatedly makes it clear they do not want treatment and this decision is supported by their parents and doctors. 

He said: "As healthcare professionals involved in the care of babies, children and young people, the priority has to be the child.

"Every action and decisions is taken in the best interests of the child, and decisions on care, including the withdrawal of treatment, are always made with the involvement of parents.

"However, we feel it is important for the public to know that decisions to withhold or withdraw treatment from a child are not made lightly.

"Decisions on whether to withdraw treatment from a child are unfortunately ones that need to be made frequently. The model is always for doctors to work closely with parents to agree on the best course of action for the child.

"In the vast majority of cases an equal decision is made to withdraw treatment and it is rare that there is disagreement. The cases where this is a significant difference in view are the ones that grab the media headlines."