The English baby that the British health plan want to kill should tell everyone a lot

When did I ever claim that?


.

 

THe OP left spmetihng out. The baby in question has a terminal illness. He will NEVER get better. The OP also fails to state the fact that the UK has a severe shortage of the medications needed to keep the baby alive, and that the government is simply making the call that only people who have a chance of getting better get the treatments to ensure that they can save as many lives as possible. If this baby's parents and their supporters get their way, several people, whose conditions are treatable unlike the baby's, will die because they will be unable to get treatment. This baby's parents want other people to die so that their kid can suffer agonizing pain for a few more months and then die anyway. .

 

Assisted suicide is the cowards way out, it's easy to die, more harder to live .

.


.

 

So you refuse to answer the question, after jumping in, insert words in my mouth and attribute desires and beliefs which you perceive to me based upon your ESP?
Yeah, don't respond as I've got no desire to converse with Miss Cleo and her psychic pals today. Its hard enough getting straight responses to asked questions, I don't need you divining beliefs and desires I don't hold or didn't state for me.

Cheers

 

Except they are taking the baby to another nation on their own dime if allowed. Did you miss that part of the story Dag?

 

I don't have to prove it, its the default presumption under the Common law ffs. Abuse, incompetence, negligence etc are what allows the voiding of that presumption in favor of the state.
And these parents have the money to take the kid elsewhere for a treatment with a physician whose qualifications are not in question, nor ethics, which treatment has a reasonable chance of providing some relief and prolongment of life. The alternative being slow death under hospice (palliative care is hospice care) over a course of weeks or months. For all the time they've spent dragging it out if they're so certain of A) current suffering at a level meriting essentially euthanasia and B) a lack of any significant value to Charlie of the proposed treatment, the treatment could be over and done with by now and the kid dead anyway and beyond such suffering.
This entire episode is simply about control, not about a child's suffering, despite the hospitals protests to the contrary.

 

Well, thankfully there are places that allow for people to make those very personal decisions. As for religion, no one has the right to inflict their beliefs upon others so when it comes to those very personal choices and decisions....screw what anyone else thinks or believes.

 

I'm not sure health care costs go up with socialized healthcare. We currently don't have that and we pay the highest health care rates in the world. So in factual your post promotes the private health care moguls scare tactic propaganda. Americans are so deathly afraid of any thing good for them because we buy into these types of scare tactics. Of course the system is rigged to always be taken advantage of. When greed is involved all bets are on. Especially in the United States. Take some time to actually see how these programs work in any other European countries. They cap costs and wages. Look at the labor laws in those countries and compare them to yours. You will be amazed to see that they are treated better than you or I by 10 fold. Look to a different source of information from time to time. Stop letting your favorite "program", program you. Then true change can happen. As long as people are confused about the facts then we are hopelessly at the mercy of the greedy pigs that live down the road from us. Challenge your programming and look for the facts in many different sources. Educate yourself you can't trust others to tell you what is what. Check all stories and decide for yourself what's, what. With the interweb being more and more regulated you may have to read it in a book.

 

I didn't say anything about God, or living as long as possible for Jesus. The child is an infant unable to express its own wishes, it perforce requires a conservator/guardian to determine same. Whether that's the state or the parents, by your apparent definition the child's life is not its own.
I've got no problem with DNRs or assisted suicide. I've had 3 grand parents and 1 great grand parent end up in palliative care, it was their choice and the only thing for them at that point. I assisted with 2 of those as much as a family member not a medical pro is able to, cleaning up, getting the meds, staying by their side, wiping their mouth, watching them decline and keeping a good front for them and so forth. Hospice is essentially assisted suicide, its increasing doses of opioids until they die. I've no problem cutting out the middle man and saying let the person have a speed ball or what have you if they're suffering that much and there's nothing you can do to alleviate it. I don't have a problem with the concept. I am a bit reticent about the state making the decision after appointing someone who has never even clapped eyes on the person, be they ever so invalid or young or incapacitated. Doubly so if the parents are not unfit and the State run hospital has simply made an end run around them because they want to get a second opinion or an experimental treatment.

 

Take your belligerence elsewhere. You are the one insisting that everyone see the situation exactly as you do, which ironically you never made very clear to begin with, so your entire soapbox philosophy and debating style is more than a bit bizarre from the jump.

 

So they've got 2 years to get jobs/support over here and otherwise be normal productive citizens/residents? O my how ever shall they do it? Its still not on the NHS dime, or do you suppose if allowed to leave that they'll be back to the place that said "we're just gonna let your kid slowly die. Its for his own good" with said kid?

 

Americans are so deathly afraid of any thing good for them

What does this even mean? So your trying to tell us that the government knows what's best for us , instead of us? That's how low you have sunken .scary.

I feel sorry for you.

 

All I asked was that you answer the question, and you did EVERYTHING but, up to and including implicitly calling me a religious fundamentalist without any sort of cause or indication on my part. If I'm flippant about how you might have arrived at that decision, you'll have to pardon me its been a long day just trying to get a few simple questions answered simply without a lot of bullshit and jibber jabber.

 

It's funny how you promote death over life, even in the animal kingdom we see a little dog trying to save the life of a little deer..

Does this little dog have medical training?





.

 

I answered your question and in truth, you are now sounding like a paranoid whack job...have an interesting life.

 

No you didn't, it's funny how you promote death for everyone except your self..

.

 

Must be a moon phase...all the whackadoodles are out in force.

 

So you went from serious till making a joke about it? How convenient for you..


.

 

You did not answer the question, you assumed a whole lot about what you thought I was trying to say and talked about that

 

It's fun being her, she can dictate who lives and who dies, accept peppermint Patty can munch on her uDoritos and DR. Pepper and say screw every one .

.

 

Good luck! Been there, done that, got the paper and the headaches and bowed out in short order.

Why does killing him represent Charlie's best interests? Funny how the best interests of the STATE (let's not spend any more money on this kid) and Charlie's best interests coincide here.

I've noticed this, too. When you speak to a lefty for long enough, you find a deep-seated death wish hidden in there somewhere. Ayn Rand said this is the problem with altruism, that the true end of altruism lies in death, to sacrifice everything, including one's own life, for the sake of others. One woman who was an abortion advocate actually said she wished her mother had aborted her. She was an attractive young woman and a high-powered New York lawyer with everything going for her, and she had a death wish. Sad, really.

 

Exactly we have these internet warriors, people who speaks and don't think, they are comfortable with death as long as it doesn't include them..


And then they make jokes about it

.

 

So there is no connection, despite your alleged law degree etc, you cannot provide evidence. Nothing more to say, your argument is over through lack of evidence.

Parents should have the final say because a child is not just a medical record!

Great argument.

 

That would be the most appalling and arrogant use of the law I ever heard, if so. Has the UK gone full communist at this point, that the state can decide if and when you're allowed to move or leave the country?

So it would be fine if the doctor did it for free?

And yet if the insurance company says no to coverage, the patient can still be treated on his own bill. He can even sue the insurance company later for recompensation. When it's the government, not only can you not pay for it yourself or sue, they don't even want you trying other countries!

i.e., The right to die? We do not recognize that right in 49/50 states, nor at the federal level.

No, we'd still argue for life.

If the judge wants the child to die, then yes, the judge wants to hurt the child. If the judge wants to take this baby away from his parents before they are ready to let him go, then yes, he wants to hurt the parents.

And here we have the left's arrogant condescending attitude to the average person on full display. I put it to you that there is absolutely no reason to believe parents are NOT capable of making the best decisions for their children until proven otherwise, and in fact, are probably the MOST capable of making the best decisions for their children because they have the most invested. No one else is going to CARE about the well-being of a child nearly as much as his/her natural parents. Are there bad parents? Yes. Are there parents who do stupid things? Yes. Does that make all parents suspect? No.

Actually, we're not discussing whether this particular child should or should not die, we're discussing who gets to decide, the state or the parents. That is definitely a matter for public discussion and debate.

And here we have the death wish again. Why is the left so enamored of death? We should probably make this the Republican Party slogan: "Choose life!"

 

Neither the state or the parents gets to decide. The child's terminal illness gets to decide.
In the case of Charlie Gard, doctors have decided his illness can no longer be treated and that the painful and invasive procedures he is undergoing, merely to keep him alive, are cruel.
The skill and dedication from the staff at GOSH has kept Charlie alive so far, but they've decided enough is enough.

Even the quack doctor from America has admitted that, though he offered to treat Charlie anyway, as long as he was paid megabucks.

Sadly, there are times when parents don't make the best decisions for their children.
This is one of them.