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

Now, now the parents are going to get 1.3 million dollars for providing an experimental animal. Seems like a pretty good deal just for subjecting your child for a bit more torture.

 

I have read it, the fact that you haven't is telling from your response however. Read it and I'll respond further. Other than that, enjoy yourself.

 

That wasn't the question under discussion. The question under discussion was whether or not calling a doctor a quack was libel per se. First you denied it, and then you wanted a case that hinged on just such a claim, that calling a doctor a quack was libel per se. I provided two of them. Check and mate.

If you believed in the rights of the individual, you'd believe Charlie had the right to every opportunity for survival. Instead you believe in the rights of the state or the collective to decide whose life is worth living and whose life isn't. Every time one of these cases comes up in the US, hundreds or thousands of people in wheelchairs and hospital beds weigh in on the side of the person in the hospital whose plug is going to be pulled, saying that everyone should get as long as possible to recover, because they don't want to be next.

Right, like keeping Charlie alive will do more harm than killing him. You have a weird definition of "harm".

 

Read the reports on the case.

 

I am not defaming 'private' medicine - nobody could - it exists to make money out of human misery, as very well you know.

 

Keeping a child artificially alive and in pain is better than his being naturally dead, is it? Your forced-birther mentality produces weird thinking in a society that normally just lets the poor die, doesn't it?

 

You tell me when you're 85 and in pain every time you wake up whether it's better to be alive and in pain or dead. As for Charlie, if he's brain-dead, can he really experience pain? Do lobsters suffer pain from being boiled alive?

Forced-birther, that's a new one.

 

Well, it seems to be part of American brainwashing that everyone has to be 'grateful' for being alive, and I've never seen it. This child has no functioning brain in the normal human sense, but we are told he can probably feel pain. Lobsters are being killed very gradually, but I don't doubt they feel pain at last. Certainly, when I can, I buy them and let them go.

 

Brief the case, and I will decide whether it is worth reading. Do you know how to do that?

 

This was your defamatory statement: "Why do you waste time in this dishonest way. This child is brain-dead; why should it be given to a foreign crank to torture?" NL

It is directed at the physician chosen by the family to treat their child, and who has testified for the family.
Are you now withdrawing your defamatory public denunciation of that physician?

 

Dude read the ****ing case i cited earlier.
Once you do that it'll become clear, I promise.
Calling someone a liar is supposed to be per se as well, but it's not according to the case because the rule is more nuanced than that.

 

As you said earlier I'm not your law clerk. Do your own research "counsel"

 

LOL! IOW, the holding does not support your position.

 

I see.

 

What I have written I have written. Should my family, for instance, be free to sell me into slavery? You know the answer, child. and you know perfectly well what American doctors work for, which isn't love of the People!

 

He's a quack. A snake oil peddler.

He's taking advantage of deeply devastated people and offering them false hope, which is disgusting.
I only hope he has the common decency to admit in court that he shouldn't have made the claims he did.
I personally expect him to oil out of it somehow, in case he's sued.
We shall see.

 

Charlie Gard parents have withdrawn the case according to latest british news.

They no longer wish him to go to the US.

 

The "free socialist healthcare" the Brits have should be better, by our American standards, it seems.

 

In the UK you always have the choice to buy a private healthcare plan.

 

The parents of terminally-ill baby Charlie Gard have ended their legal challenge to take him to the US for experimental treatment.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-40708343

 

For those interested in this case the PDF download makes very interesting reading, especially the actions of the US doctor. He was asked to visit Charlie from as early as last December, he did not until the 18th of July.
http://www.gosh.nhs.uk/news/latest-...tion-statement-issued-high-court-24-july-2017

 

Not responsive. The parents have chosen a qualified doctor to treat their child. Why is that anyone else's business?

The only question is: Is the doctor they have chosen a qualified licensed physician? Answer: yes. Case closed.

You do not like that result so you chose to defame the physician. That was a mistake that you should retract.

 

Did the qualified doctor actually take any interest in the case? Read the PDF and you decide.

 

In fact, it is illegal to call a doctor a quack. It is the textbook example of slander/libel per se.

“Defamation is an intentional tort that provides targeted individuals with remedies against persons who intentionally make malicious statements that injure the target’s character, fame or reputation. Generally, the truth of the statement is a complete defense in a suit for defamation because true statements are not considered to be malicious. Libel and slander are both forms of defamation. Libel is defamation expressed by print, writing, signs, pictures, and normally, radio and television broadcasting. Slander involves spoken words that have been heard by someone other than the target. Some actions are known as slander per se, or slander in and of themselves. Slander per se consists of especially egregious offenses, including false accusations that another person has contracted a morally offensive communicable disease, and a defamatory expression impacting directly on one’s profession, such as stating that a particular attorney is a crook, or that a doctor is a quack.” Fundamentals of Tort Law, By: Eric Baime. ©2014- 2017.
https://nationalparalegal.edu/FundamentalsTortLaw.aspx

Will the licensed physician you have defamed on a public forum find out about it?
Ask your lawyer how this sort of thing usually works.

 

Again read the PDF and the doctor may well have other things on his mind!