Charlie Gard: The Tragic Story Of A Little Baby, The Parents Who Love Him, And The Horrendous Order For Him To Die
[guest post by Dana]
As I’m sure most of you have read by now, little Charlie Gard, all of ten months old, has been ordered by the laughably named European Court Of Human Rights, to die. Or as The Washington Post put it: This terminally ill infant will be allowed to die. But first, his parents will say goodbye.:
Charlie has a rare genetic condition and resulting brain damage that has robbed him of his ability to move his arms and legs, eat or even breathe on his own.
…
British courts decided that Charlie should be allowed to die after a heartbreaking legal battle in which doctors asserted that the child had no chance of survival, and Charlie’s parents argued that there was an experimental treatment in the United States they had not tried. The case was taken all the way to the European Court of Human Rights, which declined to hear the case Tuesday, upholding previous court rulings that it was in Charlie’s best interest to withdraw life support.
Unbelievably, the court has condemned little Charlie to death, over the objections of parents Chris Gard and Connie Yates. In other words, the State has wholly usurped the role of Gard and Yates and is acting as Charlie’s parents. And they have decided that Charlie’s life is no longer of value. They have not only ordered his death, but the court also refused to allow his parents to travel with Charlie to the U.S. to receive experimental nucleoside bypass therapy (oral medication, no surgery) which may provide a small chance of helping the baby. It should be noted that Charlie’s parents have received donations totaling around 1.6 million dollars to help with costs. To sum up, the State has stripped the parents of their parental functions, and gone completely against their wishes by deciding – as the surrogate parents – that not only is their son not permitted to receive further help, he must also die at their determined time. This is simply horrific. The gross overreach of power should frighten everyone, everywhere. And it should especially be a red-flag warning to those who continue to foolishly embrace the State as if it were their “father,” while blindly yielding to its insatiable appetites.
Here is the a timeline of the legal battles concerning Charlie:
3 March 2017: Mr Justice Francis starts to analyse the case at a hearing in the Family Division of the High Court in London
11 April: Mr Justice Francis says doctors can stop providing life-support treatment
3 May: Charlie’s parents ask Court of Appeal judges to consider the case
23 May: Three Court of Appeal judges analyse the case
25 May: Court of Appeal judges dismiss the couple’s appeal
8 June: Charlie’s parents lose their fight in the Supreme Court
20 June: Judges in the European Court of Human Rights start to analyse the case after lawyers representing Charlie’s parents make written submissions
27 June: Judges in the European Court of Human Rights refuse to intervene
This past Friday, Charlie’s parents, Chris Gard and Connie Yates, appeared in a heartbreaking video to let supporters know that Charlie was scheduled to be taken off life support that day. And per the court’s ruling, he was to die in the hospital and not be allowed to return to his home where his his parents could bathe him and hold him close while whispering words of love to him as he passed from this life to the next. They also said that there would not be enough time for relatives to arrive to say their final good-byes to Charlie, nor be there to lend support.
To make matters worse, and to their everlasting shame, the Vatican announced on Friday that it was siding with the courts. Instead of modeling the Love of Christ for the weak and most vulnerable, the Vatican caved. Here is National Review’s Michael B Dougherty’s brilliant takedown of their decision:
Here was a moment for the Vatican to stand up and announce what the Catholic faith teaches about human life and our duties to one another, and the God-given authority of parents over their children. And it was a moment in which such a statement would resound with an attentive audience. It was not to come.
In fact, the statement from Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, president of the Pontifical Academy for Life, patronizes Charlie Gard’s parents even as it distorts their situation and endorses a legal judgment against their wishes that was clothed in the language of euthanasia advocates.
After two paragraphs expressing his admiration for the parents and doctors in this case, Paglia’s statement announces his moral reasoning this way:
The proper question to be raised in this and in any other unfortunately similar case is this: what are the best interests of the patient? We must do what advances the health of the patient, but we must also accept the limits of medicine and, as stated in paragraph 65 of the Encyclical Evangelium Vitae, avoid aggressive medical procedures that are disproportionate to any expected results or excessively burdensome to the patient or the family. Likewise, the wishes of parents must be heard and respected, but they too must be helped to understand the unique difficulty of their situation and not be left to face their painful decisions alone. If the relationship between doctor and patient (or parents as in Charlie’s case) is interfered with, everything becomes more difficult and legal action becomes a last resort, with the accompanying risk of ideological or political manipulation, which is always to be avoided, or of media sensationalism, which can be sadly superficial.
Dougherty goes on to note:
Paglia is on solid theoretical ground when he says that there is a judgment to be made, and that it is good to avoid “aggressive medical procedures that are disproportionate to any expected results or excessively burdensome to the patient or the family.” No one is morally obliged to be kept alive by machines all their life, or continue undergoing radical surgeries or procedures that delay death. No one is obliged to empty their entire fortune and the state isn’t obliged to expend the public treasury on uncertain treatment.
So it may be the case that Charlie Gard’s parents would be adding to the suffering of their son by traveling to America with him while he is mortally ill. It may be the wrong decision, but it should still be their decision…
Dougherty is rightfully merciless in exposing their shame in this decision:
But besides being patronizing, the Vatican’s statement is a gross distortion of the situation. It portrays the Gards as acting alongside the doctors, but subject to outside manipulation. The Gards are resisting the doctors. The Gards are not facing “their decisions.” They are facing authorities that have overridden them. The good bishop writes that the Gards “must be heard and respected, but they too must be helped to understand the unique difficulty of their situation.” The people “helping” them to understand are speaking in the euphemisms of “death with dignity.”
Dear God. The very people that should be condemning the atrocious behavior of the State and standing for life on behalf of Christ, are instead deceitfully rationalizing their “concerns” for Charlie.
As I see it, both the Vatican and the State are in agreement: 1) This terminally ill baby does not deserve to live; 2) He cannot contribute to society or to the State and do his part, so therefore, he must die; 3) He has no quantifiable value to the State; 4) The role and responsibility of conscientious parents belongs to the State anytime they deem; 5) The State is right to decide the time and place of death and acting not only as parents but also as God.
As of this morning, here is where things stand:
Great Ormond Street Hospital, where Charlie is currently staying, has delayed his removal from life support. There is a question of whether they were influenced by Pope Francis intervening on Charlie’s behalf. On Friday, the Pope tweeted, “To defend human life, above all when it is wounded by illness, is a duty of love that God entrusts to all.” Then yesterday, the Vatican released a statement:
“The Holy Father follows with affection and emotion the story of Charlie Gard and expresses his own closeness to his parents,” read a July 2 statement issued by Vatican spokesman Greg Burke.
“He prays for them, wishing that their desire to accompany and care for their own child to the end will be respected.”
Also, Archbishop Paglia is now on record saying:
We should never act with the deliberate intention to end a human life, including the removal of nutrition and hydration, so that death might be achieved.
Allahpundit has retweeted what appears to be testimony from a hearing that was held to decide what was in Charlie’s best interest. During it, the neurologist who who would be treating Charlie in the U.S. is quoted as saying that the therapy “would provide a “small chance of meaningful improvement” in Charlie’s brain function, and that Charlie may be able to interact, smile and look at objects” as a result.
Maybe, with hope and prayer, Charlie might even be able to look at his parents, and smile, knowing somewhere deep inside his soul that they loved him with an indescribable ferocity while fighting valiantly on his behalf.
And finally, this morning President Trump offered to provide help and support for Charlie, tweeting:
If we can help little #CharlieGard, as per our friends in the U.K. and the Pope, we would be delighted to do so.
I’ll try to update this post throughout the day if anything changes in Charlie’s situation.
(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)
–Dana
Sadly, this is the way of things now. Life devalued, people in seats of power playing God, stripping parents of their responsibilities, and putting babies to death. These authorities foolishly condemn themselves by their actions. Yet worse for them, they will one day, have to give an accounting for it before God.
Dana (023079) — 7/3/2017 @ 9:01 amYes they will and their judgment will be swift and harsh (like 6:25)
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2017 @ 9:14 ampope chavez is an unequivocal supporter of filthy third whirl government-run healthcare systems that are responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands every year, many of them children
he’s an evil person
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 9:22 amDeath panels are a real thing its what happens when you dint believe in the hippocratic oath
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2017 @ 9:29 amdeath panels are 100% essential and a net positive good when conjoined to a filthy third whirl government-run healthcare system like you have in leggy meggy’s britain
otherwise the whole system and the government this parasite attaches to both go broke, and even more people die
🙁
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 9:51 amDisciples of Moloch.
NJRob (7f4bec) — 7/3/2017 @ 10:21 amBy force; pure evil.
I wonder what Pope Benedict thinks.
Patricia (5fc097) — 7/3/2017 @ 10:29 amTo the Catholics here, how does the Vatican’s flip-flop on this specific sanctity of life issue make you feel about the church?
Dana (023079) — 7/3/2017 @ 11:38 amThat the Vatican is inhabited by devotees of Liberation Theology, who reflexively rubber stamp any socialist institution, is a tragedy. Pope Francis at best is presiding over a Papal administration that is willfully ignorant of the theology espoused by the previous 3 Popes. At worst, the Pope and his advisers are working to undermine the Theology of Life espoused by Pope John Paul.
How embarrassing is it, that President Trump’s tweet shamed the Vatican to change its tune.
Steven Malynn (d29fc3) — 7/3/2017 @ 11:46 amI am done with the Roman Communist Church.
Not done with Christ, though. As so many of the main line Protestant churches are.
http://www.christianexaminer.com/article/atheist.preacher.believes.god.is.an.option/48634.htm
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/i-am-both-muslim-and-christian/
F***ing hey?
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 1:25 pmTo the Catholics here, how does the Vatican’s flip-flop on this specific sanctity of life issue make you feel about the church?
Much of the Church is bound and determined to win the approbation of the secular left, no matter how much Catholic doctrine has to be sacrificed. Look no further to so-called Catholic colleges and universities that now have very restrictive speech codes, allow the crybullies to call the shots, and hire and promote faculty who hold Church teachings in utter contempt. I have a hard time these days viewing Georgetown, Notre Dame, Marquette, DePaul, and some others as legitimate Catholic universities.
The same thing is now starting to bleed over into how the Vatican deals with the world. Trendy positions regarding environmentalism, redistribution of wealth, crime and incarceration, etc. have now been adopted by the Church, and traditional teachings on sex, marriage, divorce, chastity, etc. is — if not exactly changed — at least downplayed. The current Pontiff has accelerated this — ahem — “outreach” to secularists. We no longer hear all that much about what each Catholic must do to serve the poor, we now hear what governments must do to take care of them. It’s a trend that I don’t like.
JVW (42615e) — 7/3/2017 @ 1:35 pmThis pope is getting Christians killed. He values his precious interfaith dialogue more than he values lives.
Muslims only do “interfaith dialogue” for Dawa. To advance their cause.
Christ, according to Islam, is nothing more than a slave to Allah.
Surah 4 An Nisah verse 171:
Surah 5 Al Maeda verse 72:
Christianity and Islam are not compatible. Christ would have whipped these Imams out of the temple.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 1:48 pmI think this is a bit overwrought and untrue. One could just as well (and just as unfairly) say that Charlie’s parents are indifferent to his suffering.
I sympathize with the parents and am deeply uncomfortable with governments making decisions like this.
But if you read the facts of the case, the “experimental treatment” offers no prospect of actually improving the child’s condition. I think the court has reached the morally correct decision that the parents should, responsibly, have made.
If you accept this, how is what the parents are trying to do functionally different from child abuse?
If a child is ill, the parents do not (and should not) have the unlimited right to, for instance, submerse the child in boiling water or feed the child battery acid, even if the parents are absolutely and sincerely convinced it is in the child’s best interest. There must be limits, and those limits must ultimately be based on medical realities.
Dave (711345) — 7/3/2017 @ 2:03 pmBetter not be a nickel of US taxpayers money spent on this. If there is then we will need to treat everyone in the world to taxpayer funded healthcare. I sense some shenanigans here. Especially with the Pope chiming in. The Pope already thinks I’m obligated to accommodate the world’s needy.
Jcurtis (d42778) — 7/3/2017 @ 2:20 pmHave you ever lost a child? I have. I would have gone to ends of the earth to save him.
The thing is I don’t want to imply that you shouldn’t voice your opinion. But it’s very grand of you to declare what the responsible decision would have been.
In any case, in every case, I don’t want the government making these decisions for me.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 2:21 pmDave,
I was just reading this article about parents whose child had a very similar condition to Charlie’s and became the first person in the U.S. to receive the experimental nucleoside therapy. Note: I haven’t yet checked various sources linked to yet to corroborate claims, so take it as you will. But do read the whole thing and see what you think.
Dana (023079) — 7/3/2017 @ 2:27 pmAre you seriously comparing a potentially life saving experimental treatment to battery acid?
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 2:27 pm@ Dave,
Okay, I’m going to resist snapping back at claims of being overwrought as that is a subjective claim, and you are of course, free to make it. I fully admit to being filled with outrage and deep sorrow over what is happening to this family – all at the hands of the powerful state.
With that, I reject your claim that it is an untrue statement. By acting as the parents and making this decision, they have indeed, devalued Charlie to the point where he is no longer being allowed to live. By their sheer usurpation of the function of parents who would die for him in a heartbeat, the state – which has no personal investment, love, or sacrificial heart of a parent, has made a business decision. That is how little Charlie is worth. I would also add that no parent who is conscientious and loves their child would be indifferent to his suffering. There is something with parenting that compels us to do anything and everything within our power to make sure they do not suffer. Also, I am unable to find anything that associates pain with this condition. Have you? I did read that the oral therapy does not appear to be accompanied by pain.
Dana (023079) — 7/3/2017 @ 2:35 pmI do not hesitate to let DJT have it for buffoonish tactics and his lack of core principles. However, compared to Pope Francis’ leadership, DJT is freaking Abraham Lincoln, with a dash of Alexander and Patton!
As a Roman Catholic, the dismay, sadness, and anger I have for this Pope is broad and deep. He acts like a classic Progressive by constantly probing and chipping at well understood doctrines and then denies any such thing. This latest example is pure evil at work. He knows better the gambits in which he engages. He is demonstrably intelligent. His wickedness d*mns him. DJT really does not grasp the nature of much of what he does.
It is staggering that Francis office only after one of the most doctrinaire (and brilliant) popes resigned, almost without precedent! The first pope from his hemisphere, he is. It is very difficult for me to not think something epically tragic is afoot. There sure as hell is in England and his leadership is arguably the worst of it as it will affect multiple lives going forward. Ignore his backtracking. The damage is done.
Ed from SFV (3400a5) — 7/3/2017 @ 2:36 pmMaybe that’s not what you meant, Dave.
Perhaps you can restate. I’m not the one who lofted the idea of battery acid into the conversation.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 2:38 pm* that Francis took office. Apologies for the bad edit.
Ed from SFV (3400a5) — 7/3/2017 @ 2:38 pmIf a child is ill, the parents do not (and should not) have the unlimited right to, for instance, submerse the child in boiling water or feed the child battery acid, even if the parents are absolutely and sincerely convinced it is in the child’s best interest. There must be limits, and those limits must ultimately be based on medical realities.
This does not represent an honest attempt at making an argument.
JVW (42615e) — 7/3/2017 @ 2:50 pmcharlie gard it seems you’re doomed
your little light all but consumed
oh the places you will go go go
(well, mostly up to heaven’s glow)
and peace you’ll find and laughter too
but when pope chavez passes through
say nono there’s no room for you.
your kind don’t belong up here!
send him away don’t shed a tear
cause popes what freedom abjurate
aren’t fit to pass that pearly gate
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 2:50 pmI’m sorry for mentioning it. It’s just that this Charlie Gard story cuts to the bone.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 2:54 pmIts rare you come face to face with a ghoul a strigoi a nazgul.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2017 @ 3:07 pm19. Dana (023079) — 7/3/2017 @ 2:35 pm
Don’t forget the effect on business if other doctors were able to cure someone the NHS doctors had given up hope on. That mustn’t be allowed to happen.
Sammy Finkelman (ba7dc3) — 7/3/2017 @ 3:30 pmAgreed, JVW, about the Church.
They changed the aesthetics of the Church, like the Mass and the music and the theology, while retaining the rotten hierarchy exactly as it was. When Cardinal Law was whisked away to Rome instead of serving the poor in, say, the Congo, I swear half my family dropped out.
Patricia (5fc097) — 7/3/2017 @ 3:33 pmAgreed, Patricia. Wholeheartedly.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 3:45 pmThe real crime by the doctors came before this.
They must have stalled the parents from removing the child to try something else. It shouldn’t be happening just now, when there is literally no hope (of any good outcome)
It is probably correct now that there’s so much brain damage, they can’t hope for much of life for the baby anyway, but taht was probably not the case when the parents frrst began asking
questions.
Even if the American doctor can’t cure him, or what he can offer is not of much value, he probably can say if he had been given an opportunity earlier, better things could have happened, and even if you can’t say that now, you might be able to say that several years from now.
And he could say the Britih doctors could have done other things – at least let go of the case.
Sammy Finkelman (ba7dc3) — 7/3/2017 @ 3:51 pmI’m shocked shocked I tell you:
http://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=370483
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2017 @ 3:56 pmThe CBS Evening News had a story on this, although, of course, it didn’t tell you enough to give you the full picture.
That’s where I heard sbout the doctros claiming the baby had tremednous brain damage. Probbaly true, and opriobably also true that they put off the parents from looking elsewhere.
There’s a reason I think they don’t want other doctors to examine him.
Sammy Finkelman (ba7dc3) — 7/3/2017 @ 4:08 pmGreetings:
A couple of decades back, I saw a movie that I think was called “True Confessions” with the Roberts DeNiro and Duvall playing, respectively, a corrupted priest and a police detective. At risk of giving its plot away, in the end DeNiro regains his religion and finds inner peace.
It looks like we, and I don’t just mean Catholics, have a good ways to go.
11B40 (6abb5c) — 7/3/2017 @ 4:20 pmThere is no blame to fix, sometimes.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 4:22 pm11B40, I doubt you are but are amenible but I am selling my Fort Danner Fort Lewis Boots on EBay
Know anyone who needs a lightly used pair of 8 1/2 Ds?
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 4:36 pmDanner boots. Duh!!
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 4:37 pmI spent enough time at Camp Casey to qualify for the VFW.
2nd ID. Second to none.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 4:40 pmI don’t even understand why anybody cares what the Vatican has to say about this. I thought the Queen was the head of the Church in England. Or the Archbishop of Canterbury, however they divide it up. Since 1533 or around then. And my Church has not granted any status to the Pope, except as Bishop of Rome, since 1054.
nk (dbc370) — 7/3/2017 @ 5:43 pmthis pope is uncommonly smelly
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 5:46 pmI assume they are Catholic, but it should be a concern of bit only them but protestants and orthifix because its about principle
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2017 @ 5:49 pmWell, if it is a matter of principle and not dogma, the religion you want that does not euthanize disabled infants or anybody else for that matter, and does not even permit Do Not Resuscitate directives, not even by the patient himself, is Islam.
nk (dbc370) — 7/3/2017 @ 6:10 pmIslam is pretty tranquil and pbuh with abortion though
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 6:13 pmwikipedia took a hard look at this, doing the job the cnn jake tapper fake news propaganda sluts won’t do
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 6:14 pmFor first four months of gestation. (Better than Texas, which is five.) After that it’s considered homicide.
nk (dbc370) — 7/3/2017 @ 6:27 pmnow mind you I’m no pope, but that seems more or less reasonable
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 6:29 pmI had this conversation with my daughter, yesterday. No, not about euthanasia or abortion. About socialism and fascism. The only difference is whether the authority flows downward from a Duce, Fuhrer, or Caudillo. Otherwise, they are both “everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state”, no matter how benevolent they may seem on the surface.
nk (dbc370) — 7/3/2017 @ 6:32 pmdid you talk about the role facebook plays
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 6:34 pmhow can you look at Don Lemon and not immediately think “fake news”
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 6:35 pmi guess maybe if your first thought was “turbo bottom”
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 6:35 pmWell mussoluni wee a former socialist, the esser/drexler wing of the Nazis were big into nationalization, but Franco was relatively laissez affair, other tight regimes were somewhat in the middle
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2017 @ 6:39 pmFacebook is for old ladies.
nk (dbc370) — 7/3/2017 @ 6:40 pmi agree but even that’s changing
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 6:41 pmBut you see, the point is they have nothing of consequence to say on the subject.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2017 @ 6:45 pmspeaking of old ladies
i keep reading that illinois is “rushing” to enact a budget
c’mon you guys
ur lollygagging
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 6:48 pmI think this issue is too important for digressions, except in the sense that this progressive notion that everything is material, and there is Bo other plane, causes a backlash among traditional minded folk
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2017 @ 6:52 pmI guess you thought offense.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 6:56 pmwell if you wanna stay on topic leggy meggy’s Britain needs to brexit both harder and faster i think
what can be more dehumanizing than having to submit to some ungodly stinky “European Court of Human Rights”
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:00 pmIts well I’ll use the yiddush word, vekakte,
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:04 pm56. happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:00 pm
Which has apeculiar idea of human rights.
It’s actually doctors’ rights – not to be proven wrong.
There is something (a dietary supplement) but to really help it probably needs to be diagnosed right away, and this is really rare.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/living/3318065/arthur-olga-estopinan-arturito-charlie-gard-court-case/
There are, of course, no bad side effects, unless you count lingering on (but not in pain) as a bad side effect.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/living/3318065/arthur-olga-estopinan-arturito-charlie-gard-court-case/
Sammy Finkelman (ba7dc3) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:07 pmvekakte
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:08 pmThat should instill anger on those who aren’t triffid puppets, meanwhile
https://mobile.twitter.com/nktpnd/status/882053391756800000
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:09 pm11B40 @32. I had read the book, “True Confessions, so I didn’t watch the movie. It was by John Gregory Dunne who, let us say, had a “unique” viewpoint. (Or we can say he was one cynical motherf***er who made up all kinds of pretentious sh!t to advance his storyline.) I read another one by him,”Dutch Shea, Jr.” which was even worse.
nk (dbc370) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:09 pmAllow me to mansplain for a moment – the NHS, the UK health service, is set up to be “free” at point of care to all UK citizens (broadly speaking). The downside is it is run by its administrators, each hospital runs on its own budget, and they do allow hospitals and occasionally whole health districts to go bankrupt and close. BUT all NHS hospitals are allowed to take fee-paying patients, who are then treated outside the NHS. The parents have raised 1.6 million; this would have been used for the medical transport to fly an ICU-level supported infant to the US. Now, why can’t they just use this money to instead bring the medication to the UK, and pay the hospital to continue the ICU support?
I am an oncology surgeon; I currently work in Australia, and have worked in the UK. I have patients here who fly to the UK to get experimental treatment they can’t get in Oz, as fee-paying patients in UK hospitals.
So whats the issue with this kid? In my experience, its pure pragmatism on behalf of the administrators of the hospital. If they let one patient very publicly buck the system, soon there will be more, and then they will demand the costs of treatment be bourne by the NHS. The NHS teters on complete insolvency on a daily basis, and is run by administrators who only care where their next performance bonus comes from. The whole system is repugnant.
Exactly the same arguments play out in NHS hospitals every day; its just with this one, there is a child, whose parents were not willing to lie down.
At what cost a human life? Who decides what constitutes “meaningful existence?” Certainly not me. At some stage, every treatment is experimental. Someone has to go first . . . or second, in this case.
In general, I don’t believe (see what I did there lol) in organised religion, and think DJT is a cheeto-flavoured buffoon; but he’s made the Forces for Good (TM) look like real dicks here . . .
awfulpod (9f6eaa) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:11 pmThe Krauts are the EU and they invented involuntary euthanasia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aktion_T4
nk (dbc370) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:11 pmthis is very lorenzo’s oil really
i wasn’t a fan of that movie cause
it really sorta sends the message that you can’t trust doctors and that when anyone you love gets sick you have to research on the internet until your teeth are coffee-stained and you don’t smell too good and you get fired
it’s very explicit – the movie really does say your loved one’s survival is all on you – you can’t trust the medical system
and that’s the same message I’m getting from this charlie gard story too
that’s just a suck-ass, depressing message
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:14 pmYes what part of death panel dud you miss, I forgot which character in a recent Bernie gunther was involved in that.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:17 pmAt some stage, every treatment is experimental.
i want Justin Bieber to get this as his next tattoo
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:18 pmMr. Dr. awfulpod we have a sometimes commenter named Mr. Dr. Mike K – you should check back to see if he comments
i’d love to read a discussion between you two about this
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:22 pmSo how many dead are exceptable pijachu, pick a number and put it in your spread sheet, and this exactly the way creamer and ezekiel designed the system for us
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:24 pmAwfulpod,
So little Charlie Gard is being used as an example (of warning) then. In your estimation, is there also an underlying fear by the NHS that the therapy in the US might meet with some success?
At this point, it doesn’t seem like they can allow themselves to go back on their decision, no matter how much pressure is exerted on them to do so. It will be interesting to see this play out. Especially since protests and marches are scheduled across Europe this week in support of Charlie and his parents, and against the Courts and hospital.
http://m.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/pope-francis-and-president-trump-defend-charlie-gard-from-the-courts#.WVr43IVlD7o
Dana (023079) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:24 pmDitto #67.
Dana (023079) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:25 pmMr. narciso people need to be prepared to die as opposed to mewling for the state to grant them permission to live
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:26 pmFunny it all seems to come the same place
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/07/the-romance-of-soviet-stooges.php
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:35 pmBen Shapiro offers advice on how to get Charlie and his parents here, in spite of the court ruling:
Dana (023079) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:36 pmI read the book. The book that said I don’t hate anyone.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:47 pmWhy doesn’t Trump just make a phone call to Teresa May to have her Home Office give the family permission to come to the United States?
nk (dbc370) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:48 pmnk,
Theresa May is otherwise occupied as protests and calls for her to step down are increasing. No comment either from the royal family, nor the Church of England.
Dana (023079) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:53 pm“‘Tanto’ Paranto.”
‘
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:53 pmAlso, it looks like the “Pope’s hospital” has offered to take in Charlie:
How does this not make the NHS look really awful?
Dana (023079) — 7/3/2017 @ 7:58 pmis it really about shaming socialist healthcare into being all that they can be
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 8:02 pm“‘Pinto’ Beanto.”
‘
my brother makes them super good he uses the big-ass cajun pot i gave him
i love that
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 8:04 pmWhite House stays silent on anti-Semitic connection of Trump’s anti-CNN video
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 8:09 pmCNN 5h ago
And back to the seventies on CNN.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2017 @ 8:15 pmpikachu stays silent on anti-Semitic connection of CNN fake news’ embrace of Barack Obama’s genocidal plan to have his pervy persian stroke-buddies nuke the unholy yiddish clean out of Israel
if there was no gravity
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 8:18 pmExactly.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 8:19 pmyes yes the optics of dead babies are just terrible
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 8:21 pm@82… starting with:Watergate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r97Nv8N7-mI
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/3/2017 @ 8:28 pm“It’s a big dubya I tellya!” – Lennie Pike [Jonathan Winters] ‘It’s A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World’ 1963
http://hotair.com/archives/2017/07/02/vatican-second-thought-backing-charlie-gards-parents/
The Vatican gives a maybe.
http://hotair.com/archives/2017/07/02/vatican-second-thought-backing-charlie-gards-parents/
Huzzah!
I may still puke.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 8:29 pmi don’t do bottom-feeding hotair.com clickbait
i do however like long walks on the beach and cupcakes
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 8:37 pmoK Mr. Feets. Have it your way.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 8:43 pmi always do except when i don’t
and you can take that to the bank
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 8:45 pmThat was Saturdays reading, but it appears pope Francis has moved from that untenable position since then. I say again. We are risking a hard and likely nit brief jydgement.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2017 @ 8:48 pmHow do they say, its not a bug its a feature?
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2017 @ 8:53 pmhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/02/thousands-cancer-patients-dying-needless-agony-new-data-reveals
that’s so bogus
if you have money or connections or just a nice smile you have unlimited morphine
screw the pope
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 8:55 pmI’d rather not.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 8:59 pmi’d like to teach the pope to sing in perfect harmony
but he’s a nasty third whirl p.o.s. baby-killing commie
so what do you suggest
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 9:00 pmA diet Coke.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 9:04 pmOr SNO-SEAL.
Sometimes I have to think about it.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 9:08 pmThe ten gauge always works.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 9:09 pmi keep it to myself i know what it means
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 9:10 pmhttp://thecmp.org/
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 9:12 pmmeanwhilst Mr. Matt Drudge has a flaming bold font red hardon for noko missiles aimed vaguely at Japan
this could be big
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 9:13 pmhttp://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/cardinal-mller-theres-no-problem-between-me-pope-francis-49347
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2017 @ 9:19 pmwell except for Pope Francis being SATAN and all
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 9:25 pmthird whirl futwit
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 9:25 pmOne step fiwars, two steps back.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2017 @ 9:42 pmWhite House stays silent on anti-Semitic connection of Trump’s anti-CNN video
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 9:59 pmCNN 10h ago
Court rejects EPA attempt to halt Obama-era methane rule
piggy-pow John McCain sez this is righteous judicials!
i’m so totally craving penis of a southeast asian provenance!
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2017 @ 10:07 pmMy Pope is a ca-hak sucking d###. A disgusting lefty turd. May God wisk him away.
But yes, the Catholic Church has allowed the Commies in.
Blah (44eaa0) — 7/3/2017 @ 10:34 pm@16 and 18 (Dana)
The article you linked in 16 notes:
Obviously, if there was any realistic prospect of a happy ending, however remote, it would be evil not allow the parents to pursue it. Everything I have read, based on expert medical opinion, says that’s not the case here.
Concerning my comment about the court “deciding that Charlies life no longer has value”, the court did not make any judgment about the value of the child’s life. The judgment is that the poor child should not suffer even more than he already has when there is no prospect of material improvement.
Suppose that, instead of a medical treatment that doctors say will not help, the parents were holding out hope for a divine miracle curing their child. Would you support keeping the baby on life-support indefinitely, unable to move or breathe, with irreversible brain damage, on the basis of the parents’ hopes for a divine miracle cure?
I think the real situation is no different. The “experimental treatment” (which doctors say can’t cure the child’s condition) is just a miracle cure with scientific window dressing.
@15,17,20,22 (Steve57, JVW)
Steve I am sorry for your loss.
With the battery acid analogy I was drawing a reductio ad absurdum of the argument that the parents should always have the final decision, regardless of what medical science says.
As above, that was premised on the reported fact that the “experimental treatment” is not actually “potentially life-saving”.
According to the doctors with the most complete knowledge of Charlie’s condition, the list of possible outcomes looks like:
1) End life support and the child suffers for a few more hours or days before dying in his present state,
2) Apply “experimental treatment” and the child suffers for several more weeks or months before dying in his present or even worse state,
In scenario 1, the parents are concerned because they believe (contrary to the medical consensus) that more could have been done, whereas in scenario 2, the parents are (maybe) comforted that no effort was spared (even though the additional effort had no real prospect of success).
The reason I believe the court made the morally correct decision is that forcing the child to suffer longer merely to make his parents feel better after the inevitable (unhappy) ending is not right.
If you want to say the doctors and science are all wrong, and there is some real prospect of recovery, then we are back to hoping for a divine miracle cure by another name.
Dave (711345) — 7/3/2017 @ 10:41 pmDave, you don’t know me.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/3/2017 @ 10:51 pmI would withdraw care if it were useless. There is a difference between killing and a Do Not Resuscitate order. There is a difference between artificially maintaining life and killing. But I will not kill without right.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/4/2017 @ 12:03 amIn the old days a government official might give you a chance to shoot an apple off your son’s head.
Pinandpuller (dc2949) — 7/4/2017 @ 12:08 amMy grandma was a DAR so we had to keep up with the CPR certifications.
Pinandpuller (dc2949) — 7/4/2017 @ 12:09 amMy family didn’t get here that early. My ancestors didn’t even fight in the civil war. But I do have my Great Uncle’s discharge certificate from WWI framed and hanging on my wall. And we participated in every war since.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/4/2017 @ 12:21 amI can’t even read his name. It was written in pencil. it faded.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/4/2017 @ 12:23 amIt’s likely Helen Mirren won’t be getting her kit off for this NHS romcom.
Pinandpuller (e6a674) — 7/4/2017 @ 12:34 amSteve57
I expect your reparations bill will be pro rated.
Pinandpuller (e6a674) — 7/4/2017 @ 12:36 amMy reparations bill? My family came from a village full of *** and donkeys and malaria. When we got here we ate off of orange crates. And happy to do it. I got to join the finest Navy in the world. Where every day is a holiday, and every meal is a feast.
What do you mean, reparations?
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/4/2017 @ 12:57 amThe issue isn’t whether the Parents decision is the right one. The issue is that the State has decided to make it for them, and this is an abomination.
I recall the Terri Schiavo case. Yes, medical examination of her corpse is said to have shown that she could not possibly have recovered to any degree. That doesn’t change the fact that, despite the existence of close family members willing to pay for continued treatment, the unsupported opinion of a person who would benefit from her death was allowed to hold sway. In a few decades we had gone from “We may allow you to die from lack of heroic measures if you leave clear written instructions to that effect” to “We will allow you to die based on hearsay evidence proffered by somebody who will benefit from your death.”
*shudder*
In this new case we have medical experts making a decision outside their proper field of authority. If they were merely saying “We ourselves will not perform this treatment because we believe it is wrong to do so” I would have no problem. They are not doing to. What they are saying is “We are the High Priests of Life and Death and you will not be allowed to ignore us.”
They should be executed.
Yes, the parents decision to try this new therapy may be a tragedy that prolongs the child’s suffering and their own. But the decision is theirs, or should be. For an agent of the State to decide not merely what the State will do in the case, but what the Parents will be allowed to to is deeply frightening.
C. S. P. Schofield (99bd37) — 7/4/2017 @ 1:11 amI served with a young lady from Vietnam we nicknamed Low Westwoman. I won’t go into why, as that might identify her, but if she hadn’t already been married I would have married her.
I don’t know how it would have worked out. I don’t even like Vietnamese food. Food is important.
I would have probably ended up doing the cooking. If she could have stood up to my calimari and pasta rapido and saltembocca.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/4/2017 @ 1:43 amC. S. P. Schofield (99bd37) — 7/4/2017 @ 1:11 am:
Exactly. The most galling thing I have ever read is that the government wanted the child to die with dignity.
Not the parents.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/4/2017 @ 1:53 amThis is like the experts at the kiensington council, who insisted the cladding must go up because skyfpdtagin
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2017 @ 5:12 amThe other reason they don’t want the baby out of their hands is because they want to dissect him for study, I suspect.
nk (dbc370) — 7/4/2017 @ 5:17 am109. Dave (711345) — 7/3/2017 @ 10:41 pm
But why is it not the case? Did they know of the other treatment, and conceal it from the parents? Did they discourage the parents from looking elsewhere? Did they make some kind of false promises of help?
What seems to be the case is that some damage is reversible, but not by too much. It’s reversible, and also further deterioration can be prevented, but it hasn’t been “scientifically proven” with a study. Which is the strongest kind of rot.
If we had the same standards now as we did in the 1920s, it would have taken twenty five years to start treating diabetics with insulin. (There is one field of medicine where we still have those old standards: surgery, and we get the bad and the good from that. We have bad surgical operations, and we have life-saving help, and how much of one and how much of the other we have depends on the good judgment and the integrity of the doctors.)
And I wouldn’t want there to be a study with this because whatever is being done needs to be tweaked on the fly, and it’s also unethical of course because it requires some patients not to get treated when the people doing the study believe that it works.
Sammy Finkelman (081278) — 7/4/2017 @ 7:27 amDave @109:
If that’s the case they should have said that anything they did since October, or since they arrived at the correct diagnosis, was futile and merely prolonged the baby’s suffering (as they are now contending.) There’s actually no suffering now any more.
You should read what awfulpod said @62: The NHS teeters on complete insolvency on a daily basis, and each hospitals and even whole health districts can go bankrupt and close. They do take fee paying patients, and he knows people (among his patients) who have gone from Australia there for experimental (cancer) treatment. He’s a surgeon, so it’s other treatment. Surgery doesn’t have this kind of regulation, although medical devices now do.
But the problem is, he says, is that if they let one patient escape the system, others will, and tehn they’ll maybe be required to pay for it.
I don’t think that’s precisely the case here because this treatment is cheap. It’s more years of care since what it does is merely stablizies someone, and only slightly reverses things, but they ave plenty of cases like that.
Rather, I think the problem is something else: It’s that they want to uphold the reputation of their hospital, and continue to claim taht they give the best possible care. They don’t want some other doctor or medical institution to succeed where they failed.
This is also true in the United States, and so hospitals only want to discharge patients to a hospice, or a nursing home for palliative care, and if they can’t, have them die on their watch, or right after, but never have them go to another hospital or doctor which cures them. That will severely harm their reputation.
But in the United states they can only mislead people or stall, r rely on people’s ignorance of their opportunities (and most other doctors don’t want to take over cases anyway)
They don’t usually have the force of law behind them.
Here they did. But anyway they won – they stalled long enough for the other treatment to be of not much help.
Sammy Finkelman (081278) — 7/4/2017 @ 7:39 am123. nk (dbc370) — 7/4/2017 @ 5:17 am
Maybe more important is that somebidy else doesn’t dissect him, and discover mistakes in treatment, or in diagnosis.
Sammy Finkelman (081278) — 7/4/2017 @ 7:40 amA life deemed unworthy subject to abortion. The progressive slope.
n.n (9792c9) — 7/4/2017 @ 7:58 ambaby… dissect him for study
and cannibalized for the lucrative clumps of cells and spare parts. Planned Parenthood.
n.n (9792c9) — 7/4/2017 @ 8:00 amDana, you are no doubt correct about NHS making this a learning experience about their supreme authority. Also, we cannot discount their pure cowardice. The worse thing for a bureaucrat is to be caught out in the open under the glare of the public. None of these “authorities” have come forward to defend themselves, to my knowledge.
Bureaucrats never change their minds, even on small things, like how to run their little fiefdoms or bigger things like the fact that eating fat does not make one fat. Changing their mind on this one would kill them.
Patricia (5fc097) — 7/4/2017 @ 8:18 amI don’t know about spare parts — nobody wants that genetic material in his body — but definitely for research.
nk (dbc370) — 7/4/2017 @ 8:22 amThe NHS isn’t interested in research. Besides, they already have blood and tissue sammples and the DNA is sequenced.
Sammy Finkelman (081278) — 7/4/2017 @ 9:02 amGenerations ago,when I was young a TS 21 infant had the misfortune to have two university emplyed parents at IU Bloomington.The infant had esophageal atresia (closed GI tract) which was easily surgically repairable.The parents refused permission for the surgery condemning the baby to starve,
corwin (6d3e8e) — 7/4/2017 @ 1:21 pmParents like that are the reason modern governments have the power to take control of baby Charlie’s life, corwin. In recent times, governments stepped in to protect children from selfish/stupid parents. As a result, now we all have to deal with governments that think they know better than everyone.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2017 @ 1:38 pm@124
You are usually admirably measured in your remarks Sammy, but that is remarkably cynical (and baseless, as far as I can tell) conspiracy-mongering.
Charlie is reportedly only the 16th person ever diagnosed with this condition. He appeared completely healthy at birth. The idea that doctors somehow had the ability to save him but consciously chose not to is rather bizarre.
It emerged in testimony that the doctor who performs the “experimental treatment” was not even aware of how serious Charlie’s condition was and said he was “less enthusiastic” after he learned the truth during the court proceedings.
The treatment in question hasn’t even advanced to the stage of testing in mice with the same condition as Charlie.
Pediatricians also testified that it is very likely Charlie is experiencing pain (since he can’t move or make a sound, there is no way to be certain). People in the terminal stages of a degenerative illness are not usually comfortable, though.
I guess, ultimately, most people agree there is a point at which efforts to prolong life without any chance of real improvement should cease, and the question in this case is whether you trust the doctors to honestly assess that chance, or you trust the mother who (understandably) wants to believe in the impossible.
Dave (711345) — 7/4/2017 @ 2:11 pmit’s not cynical the parents have a lot of resources to put towards this case
but the fascist doctors at the NHS are all bloodthirsty for this little baby to die
if it were leggy meggy what was looking for one last attempt at a treatment that could save her life you know goshdarn well she’d get it
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/4/2017 @ 2:29 pmOff topic but frumps are seeing red; Melania is looking her very breast today at the White House in blue.
“Please don’t hate me because I’m beautiful.” – Pantene shampoo ad tag line, 1980’s
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/4/2017 @ 2:30 pmIt is understandable Charlie’s mother would fight for him. Most people consider that a positive thing, especially when so many powerful people don’t want to fight for him.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2017 @ 3:01 pmThe medical community is supposed to help people. It is incredibly difficult to have a child that the medical community wants to give up on. You have to fight the disease and the doctors.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2017 @ 3:03 pmWit is sad when doctors refuse to abide by the hippocratic oath, but this is the procrustean bed that single payer forces one into.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2017 @ 3:07 pmI wouldn’t allow that Papist strunz anywhere near my healthy children
Angelo (0ada1a) — 7/4/2017 @ 4:44 pmI agree with you about single-payer, narciso, but this attitude has been around for decades — long before socialized medicine. There are few doctors who welcome cases they don’t understand and don’t know how to treat, so sometimes they blame the patient. It is human nature to get frustrated with difficult problems, but rare diseases seem especially hard for doctors to handle.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2017 @ 4:59 pmI suppose so, but government mandates, take the pelletier case, give an excuse, for what they already want to do,
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2017 @ 5:10 pmAbsolutely.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2017 @ 5:55 pmand strikingly very few outlets, either here, and specially over there want to broach it, there’s a column in the telegraph but that’s about it,
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2017 @ 6:35 pmCanada to Pay $10 Million and Apologize to Ex-Gitmo Inmate Guilty of Murdering US Medic
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/4/2017 @ 6:37 pmgee where will that money end up, prime minister zoolander, baffles,
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2017 @ 6:41 pmdoes it seem like their priorities are out of whack,
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/882377597610545152
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2017 @ 7:30 pmDo you have any evidence that monetary considerations played a role in the doctors’ recommendation or the court’s decision?
The stated rationale, by the doctors and the court, was to prevent unnecessary pain and suffering that would result from prolonging the process of death without any hope of recovery.
On what basis do you assume that dozens of people are complicit in trying to kill a sick child who they secretly (according to you) believe might otherwise live?
What the parents want to do would cost the state nothing, since they propose to pay for it themselves, overseas.
And they could not get ANY doctor to say that the treatment they want to try might possibly cure the child or save his life. Not one. Not even the doctor outside the UK who would do the treatment. In fact, that doctor explicitly said the opposite.
Dave (711345) — 7/4/2017 @ 8:04 pmThat is the procedure the spec denies was conducted or hursi Ali, bow.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2017 @ 8:16 pmIt is not surprising that the doctors agree. Medicine is based on statistics. Rare diseases aren’t represented in the medical statistical models and not many doctors see or treat, let alone advocate for, patients who have rare diseases.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2017 @ 8:46 pmI think there only 16 cases of this tare condition.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2017 @ 8:49 pmOk, Dave. Doctors, whose whole life consists of rationing out healthcare as employees of the NHS care more about the baby’s well-being and quality of life than his parents do; and their real reasons for wanting to kill him is to spare him pain and suffering and not to spare themselves having to justify to the bureaucracy which holds their careers in its hands the tremendous expense he is incurring NHS.
I really like that first part. They love the baby more than his parents do. Keep on saying things like that, it’s very persuasive.
nk (dbc370) — 7/4/2017 @ 8:49 pmIs there a purpose to being a Tory:
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2017 @ 8:58 pmhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/04/families-living-wealthiest-parts-country-must-accept-new-homes
Dave, we should put motivations aside. Everyone believes they are justified and doing the right thing. Even antisemitic dogmatic trolls bashing anyone who criticizes Dear Leader Trump believe, somehow, that they are moral people. And at the same time, they fall into the lazy trap of thinking that the people they disagree with are just evil. That’s sometimes true, but everyone in this matter thinks they are right.
What really matters is that it’s just wrong for bureaucrats to take control of a man and woman’s boy. Motherhood and fatherhood are sacred. It’s as simple as that. Sometimes, a parent is so awful that they have violated their parenthood with abuse and neglect and the state does have to step in, but when parents actually want to give their child a chance, and have no other motivation, for bureaucrats to step in with their judgment is simply wrong. It’s a perversion. We’ve had a lot of canaries dying about the government overstepping by shutting down a beach or banning something or having some scandals, but to kill a child out of the bureaucracy’s idea of good? The motivations of the bureaucrats really do not matter at that point because it’s none of their business, it’s not their place.
Dustin (ba94b2) — 7/4/2017 @ 9:29 pmThey are not allowed, and this was the mindset of one of the big boosters of the mgs and socialism in general, George Bernard shaw.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2017 @ 9:35 pmYou want Single-Payer?
askeptic (8d10f9) — 7/4/2017 @ 10:58 pmThis is Single-Payer!
Remember how they idolized the mhs as the London Olympics this is their temple and thecsacrifices are not metaphorical.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2017 @ 11:10 pm@askeptic:This is Single-Payer!
It’s considerably worse than that. This is not the NHS refusing to pay for the treatment–after all private insurance sometimes refuses to pay for treatments too.
The treatment will be paid for by someone else, but the NHS demands that that baby die. They do not want the baby to die so they avoid paying for treatment. They want the baby to die. And a court has ordered that it be so.
Frederick (9c5bb0) — 7/4/2017 @ 11:12 pmIt comes from the same root, feudal really you belong to the state, this is a notion we shies a way from since the magna Carta, but the Beveridge bill of 1946 codified it.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2017 @ 11:15 pmIt is not that that the doctors care more, it is that they are better informed about the child’s real condition and prospects for recovery, and less influenced by irrational (entirely understandable and admirable, but mistaken) emotional thinking.
And as I pointed out (and you conveniently ignored) it is not just NHS doctors who think Charlie cannot get well.
Stop putting words in my mouth, I never said they loved the baby more.
I asked for evidence that financial considerations were involved, and nobody has provided any.
Let me ask this: suppose instead of lying there inert and silent (since he can’t move or make a sound), little Charlie was screaming in pain day in and day out. Would you still want to keep him alive in that condition for weeks or months, to try a procedure that not a single doctor anywhere believes will improve his prospects for survival?
The pediatricians treating him believe he is in pain, and it is hard to imagine how someone whose organs and muscles are all in the process of dying wouldn’t be.
Dave (711345) — 7/4/2017 @ 11:40 pm@154
I agree, even though I think the court has made the correct and moral decision (the one the parents should have made) in this case.
Dave (711345) — 7/4/2017 @ 11:53 pm@118 Steve57
Reparations demanded by slave people from non slave people. The longer your family has been here the more you pay. Ax anyone.
Pinandpuller (605544) — 7/5/2017 @ 1:40 am@120 Steve57
Have you ever tried Vietnamese coffee? I started drinking Trung Nguyen premium blend. I had to buy something called a phin to brew it over a mug. Their style uses condensed milk but I use heavy cream, hot or cold. Very good.
BTW have you heard about the Lone Star Tick? It makes you allergic to red meat. Since you like food you should probably avoid them.
Pinandpuller (605544) — 7/5/2017 @ 1:52 am@159 narciso
Resistance is feudal.
Pinandpuller (605544) — 7/5/2017 @ 1:55 amIt’s about…you’re a G.D. subject and don’t you G. D. forget it. Want another lesson?
Richard Aubrey (a09608) — 7/5/2017 @ 4:31 amAnd as I pointed out (and you conveniently ignored) it is not just NHS doctors who think Charlie cannot get well.
I was doing you a favor. “Cannot get well” is eugenics thinking. Tiergartenstrasse 4 thinking. “It’s defective, it will always be defective, let’s just kill it.”
nk (dbc370) — 7/5/2017 @ 4:32 amI haven’t had that brand, but there is another that I found in a local shop.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/5/2017 @ 5:31 amG 7 is thecdesignation of the ones I like in the afternoon.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/5/2017 @ 6:12 amYou think they see 1984 a a how to manual:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/04/families-living-wealthiest-parts-country-must-accept-new-homes
narciso (d1f714) — 7/5/2017 @ 6:27 amDave:
I strongly disagree. Rare diseases are, by definition, rare. Doctors know very little about them. (Where they handle rare diseases in the US, they say “information is lacking.”) No one knows Charlie’s prognosis unless they do nothing, and then the prognosis is painfully clear.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2017 @ 6:32 amLand in England and Wales is not allodial. It all belongs to the Crown, in more than theory. Further, in many places, its is explicitly under long term ground lease and not fee, making the point more obvious.
nk (dbc370) — 7/5/2017 @ 6:36 amThe British counterpart to peter singer:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/05/charlie-gard-case-lord-winston-criticises-vatican-trumps-unhelpful
narciso (d1f714) — 7/5/2017 @ 6:38 amInfantile mitochondrial depletion can cause death within a few years. Why should doctors be the ones to decide when that happens? What if the many medical organizations that are working with this disease find something that might help this family?
The only thing some people with rare diseases have is hope. The worst thing about this case is it takes hope away and suggests hope is futile.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2017 @ 6:47 amIt is not moral to deny hope.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2017 @ 6:50 amAnother child has survived with this condition, and a US hospital has offered to treat Charlie for free. My guess is it’s the Cleveland Clinic, which has a program to treat this disease. (If so, they couldn’t ask for a better hospital in the world.) Why deny this chance to someone, especially to a baby?
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2017 @ 6:56 am173. DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2017 @ 6:47 am
Oh, I think they gave them hope, until time ran out, but they were lying all the time.
They didn’t want any help to come from anyone but them.
They have a whole priniple of never, or almoost never using “unproven” treatments.
And the standards for proving anything in this case are virtually impossible to meet even if you are willing to wait for the next generation and spend enormous amounts of time and money.
Tests on mice? Like there are mice with this condition? Meanwhile there is anecdotal evidence. For those who disparage anecdotak evidence, what are internships and clinical training all about?
They do give them hope. But they lie. Because their way is no hope. And not because there really is no hope.
Sammy Finkelman (081278) — 7/5/2017 @ 6:58 amIt could also be Columbia University Medical Centre in New York, where the little boy with this condition was treated. Also a good medical facility.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2017 @ 6:59 amDoctors are human, Sammy, so I’m sure some lie but my experience in dealing with doctors is that almost all of them want to help. However, their time is limited and I’m sure treating rare diseases is very time-consuming. If you have a rare disease, it’s important to find doctors with the time and desire to treat the condition and that usually means a research facility with doctors whose careers are focused on that condition.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2017 @ 7:03 am175. DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2017 @ 6:56 am
And demonstrate that
somebody else can do better than them???
I’m telling you, that’s the real reeason, although they will talk rot about any alternative not being “scientifically proven”, np “scientific basis” for assuming anything will work etc.
You give examples? That’s “anecdotal evidence!” There are no “effective therapies.” That’s our story, and we’re sticking to it. And we’ll stall and keep on doing futile things until there really is no hope. At that point, we will propose, and try to force, an “end to his suffering.”
Mr. Justice Nicholas Francis of the High Court’s Family Division, said “unanimity among the experts from whom I have heard that nucleoside therapy cannot reverse structural brain damage,” which is correct, or close to correct, but that doesn’t say it couldn’t have prevented it.
He said death is “in Charlie’s best interests.” If so, wasn’t that true back when this started? Why did they prolong his agony? What did all the treatment do? Used up time, preveneted them from looking elsewhere, that’s what it did.
Sammy Finkelman (081278) — 7/5/2017 @ 7:09 am178. DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2017 @ 7:03 am
They lie about the prognosis or soft pedal it. And that comes even more from other hospital workers.
When a doctor gives a bad prognosis that’s probably the case – for that doctor or hospital.
And some hospitals, particularly those that want to maintain good reputations, don’t want that to happen.
The only acceptable outcomes are cures, or “death with dignity”
Not someone else curing, or substantally extending life or relieving suffering on a case that they gave up on.
The last thing they want is transfer to different doctors. That could show them up. This probably stems from the highest adnministrative level in the hospital. After all, who went to court – the doctors or the hospital?
Sammy Finkelman (081278) — 7/5/2017 @ 7:18 amGo try to get a discharge from a hospital taht doesn’t want to discharge someone.
One hospital in New York released a patient but only after issuing a death certificate. (there truly was not too much to do, but the family at least wanted him to die on his own time.)
http://www.jta.org/2017/06/25/news-opinion/united-states/brooklyn-man-issued-death-certificate-while-on-life-support-dies
Sammy Finkelman (081278) — 7/5/2017 @ 7:19 amIt takes time to diagnose rare diseases and some people never get a diagnosis.
I think everyone is being sincere here, Sammy, but you are probably right that the parents care more about keeping Charlie around than the doctors do.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2017 @ 7:20 amI also agree that once doctors make up their minds that something should or shouldn’t be done, they won’t change them.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2017 @ 7:25 amI dint grant them the benefit of the doubt
narciso (d1f714) — 7/5/2017 @ 7:26 amDave,
If you are not deeply frightened by the authority the State is assuming in this case, I suggest that you are not paying attention.
C. S. P. Schofield (99bd37) — 7/5/2017 @ 8:52 amI agree with CSP Schofield. In addition, advice from medical, scientific and legal professionals is meant to inform us. Professional advice is not supposed to replace our ability to make independent, informed decisions … even though unfortunately many people today believe it does.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2017 @ 9:43 amA couple of interesting updates. First, foreign secretary Boris Johnson has told Italy that Charlie cannot be moved to the “Pope’s hospital”:
Because the courts and the hospital are now the surrogate parents. The parents are made irrelevant.
Second, Theresa May refuses to intervene on Charlie’s behalf and backs the courts:
Dana (023079) — 7/5/2017 @ 9:57 amI think doctors and research scientists have convinced themselves and society that, because they have special knowledge, their decisions are always better than laymen’s decisions. They do have special knowledge and there are areas where that knowledge is certain and generally trustworthy, but there are still many areas where their knowledge is more uncertain art than certain science. Rare diseases are one of those areas.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2017 @ 12:39 pm188. DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2017 @ 12:39 pm
theer are areas where they know and theer are areas where they don;t know, but that’s not limited to rare diseases.
Any place where the prognosis is bad is a place where the possibility exists that somewhere out there there is somebody with a better treatment idea. And they are not all quacks.
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 7/5/2017 @ 1:05 pmThat’s true, Sammy.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2017 @ 1:31 pmIf it were not true, it would mean that no further progress on that disease or condition was possible.
Well, actually they would hold that it was, but only through approved channels.
And the other posisbilitirs aren;t even unknown.
For instance, for ebola, or any infection impervious to antibiotics: dialysis.
http://time.com/3586271/ebola-treatment-dialysis-blood/
This can work for any infectious disease. The thing being filtered out can be set on the fly.
It just requires money – and the courage of someone’s convictions – to scale up. The U.S. military ought to be studying and preparing this.
Theer are all kinds of lost and ignored cures. Quackery too, and it may get more publicity, because serious people with hopes of mainstreaming something are scared of the FDA, but the human mind should be capable of distinguishing between the two.
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 7/5/2017 @ 1:48 pmIt’s not your great-granddaddy’s Inquisition. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/vatican-police-raid-drug-fueled-gay-orgy-cardinal-apartment-article-1.3302974
nk (dbc370) — 7/5/2017 @ 4:11 pmThere is nothing preventing them from coming to the US and dying from simple lack of funds.
Ugly? Absolutely. But no one has a solution on offer. Socialized medicine kills this child. Privatized medicine kills this child.
We could put trillions into healthcare and be the savior of this child and millions of others. We could be a shining example to the world. But that is not happening, is it?
Oh please (d8ebd4) — 7/7/2017 @ 12:59 pm