A couple who want to take their terminally ill baby son to the United States for treatment have lost a fight in the European Court of Human Rights after exhausting all legal options in the UK.
Chris Gard and Connie Yates, who are in their 30s and come from Bedfont, west London, wanted 10-month-old Charlie Gard, who suffers from a rare genetic condition and has brain damage, to undergo a therapy trial in the US.
Specialists at Great Ormond Street Hospital in London, where Charlie is being cared for, said therapy proposed by a doctor in the US was experimental and would not help.
They said life-support treatment should stop.
Charlie's parents had asked European court judges in Strasbourg, France, to consider their claims after judges in the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court in London ruled in favour of Great Ormond Street doctors.
But Strasbourg judges on Tuesday refused to intervene.
A Great Ormond Street spokeswoman said the European Court decision marked "the end" of a "difficult process".
Ms Yates, who had screamed when Supreme Court justices dismissed an appeal earlier this month, told Sky News the European court ruling was "upsetting".
The Great Ormond Street spokeswoman said there would be "no rush" to change Charlie's care.
She said there would be "careful planning and discussion".
"Our thoughts are with Charlie's parents on receipt of this news that we know will be very distressing for them," said the Great Ormond Street spokeswoman.
"Today's decision by the European Court of Human Rights marks the end of what has been a very difficult process and our priority is to provide every possible support to Charlie's parents as we prepare for the next steps."
She added: "There will be no rush by Great Ormond Street Hospital to change Charlie's care and any future treatment plans will involve careful planning and discussion."
European court judges announced their decision in a statement after analysing written arguments from lawyers representing Charlie's parents.
A spokeswoman said in the statement that European judges had "endorsed in substance" the approach of UK judges.
She said the UK legal framework was compatible with European human rights legislation.
Lawyers representing Charlie's parents had argued that the couple's human rights and Charlie's human rights were being undermined.
A barrister said the couple's right to respect for family life was being infringed and Charlie's right to life and liberty violated.
He said decisions by UK judges amounted to "an unfair and disproportionate interference" in the couple's parental rights.
A High Court judge had in April ruled against a trip to America and in favour of Great Ormond Street doctors.
Mr Justice Francis concluded that life-support treatment should end and said Charlie should be allowed to die with dignity.
Three Court of Appeal judges upheld that ruling and three Supreme Court justices dismissed a further challenge by the couple.
Mr Justice Francis made a ruling after a trial in the Family Division of the High Court in London.
He heard that Charlie, who was born on August 4 last year, has a form of mitochondrial disease, a condition which causes progressive muscle weakness and brain damage.
Specialists in the US had offered a therapy called nucleoside.