Charlie Gard

Tosno · 17 Jul 2017 at 16:33

Spud21 said:
How exactly is not artificially keeping someone alive Euthanasia? I'd say it's more of a stain on the pro life nutters who would rather an innocent suffer rather than let nature take it's course, he can't be cured, the treatment may mean he gets to be a vegetable (yay, what a great life). At the end of the day the doctors have a duty of care to the poor kid, and part of that duty of care is to not allow any unnecessary suffering, you can't just keep the kid ventilated in perpetuity on the off chance that eventually someone works out how to improve his condition above that of a vegetable.

I do not begrudge the parents one bit, they are desperate to save their child, but the fact that they are essentially being offered snake oil by people trying to make a lot of money is unbelievable.

As for your ridiculous assertion that people don't want him to recover, source or I call total and utter bull on your statement, and possibly the most retarded thing I've read in a long time.

Luckily Wilson Greatbatch, wasn't of the opinion of not keeping people *artificially alive* and 'letting nature take it's course'. Indeed the treatment *may* mean he stays in a vegetable state but it *may* not, what *will* happen is that the parents know they did everything they could for their child. At the end of the day the only alternative is for Charlie to suffocate without dignity and get eaten up by maggots far too early. As for your quip about pro life "nutters" they are already stained and have nothing to lose unlike the Die with Dignity™ crowd. You want a source for my "ridiculous assertion" that is my opinion as stated above? Well ok... It's Tosno.

The Running Man · 17 Jul 2017 at 17:52

I have full sympathy for the parents but this is why the NHS cannot continue to exist as the costs associated with individuals cannot be paid indefinitely by society in cases such as this.

ChroniC · 17 Jul 2017 at 17:56

The Running Man said:
I have full sympathy for the parents but this is why the NHS cannot continue to exist as the costs associated with individuals cannot be paid indefinitely by society in cases such as this.

glenimp617 · 17 Jul 2017 at 18:06

Ignoring reality for a second where NHS staff haven't had a pay rise, less people coming into the profession, cutbacks, local closures, burdened with high interest building loans, providing foreign healthcare without payment etc etc

Didn't you know, when in our ageing society there is a never ending money tree which needs no extra investment from the tax payer

You've only got to look at all the latest drugs available on the NHS....unlike other countries who have to go without due to the costs

It's amazing!

StriderX · 17 Jul 2017 at 18:55

Except taxes are a result of investment and government spending, not the cause.

Minstadave · 17 Jul 2017 at 19:05

The Running Man said:
I have full sympathy for the parents but this is why the NHS cannot continue to exist as the costs associated with individuals cannot be paid indefinitely by society in cases such as this.

My eyes

Sliver · 17 Jul 2017 at 19:30

The Running Man said:
I have full sympathy for the parents but this is why the NHS cannot continue to exist as the costs associated with individuals cannot be paid indefinitely by society in cases such as this.

Fortunately you are In a minority. If we don't stop making supercilious decisions without full or majority consent via our citizens, then nothing will change. Politicians always promise the world but most fail to deliver. And it's our fault for voting them in. Who here reads a manifesto in the run to the election? Indeed. Rhetorical points aside, the NHS is a cushion for those who would never be able to pay the opulent medical bills which you will be happily charged every time you get sick. Recently I suffered a minor injury which got infected and swelled up like a sausage in a tunnel. Alarmed I went to my GP and was given a course of anti-biotics, which are great. My iininjury is still healing but the swelling went away fast as did the bruising. Without those pills my infection may have spread and killed me. That's not hyperbole BTW, That's what my GP told me. The NHS are a national treasure. If you want to save money RunningMan, how about defence spending???

Vonhelmet · 17 Jul 2017 at 19:37

Spoilers: he won't recover.

This is like that absurd Terri Schiavo case all over again.

mmj_uk · 21 Jul 2017 at 17:48

I don't think the current court case is the last we'll hear of this, from what I've just read today the hospital have presented up to date MRI scans showing that his mental condition has severely deteriorated since April and this is being used as evidence that he shouldn't be given treatment, if his parents lose I would expect them to sue the hospital for preventing him from getting treatment when his condition wasn't so bad. In fact they might sue eventually even if they win because the whole court case has dragged on so long it'll undoubtedly have hurt the chances and extent of any recovery.

Dolph · 21 Jul 2017 at 19:13

mmj_uk said:
I don't think the current court case is the last we'll hear of this, from what I've just read today the hospital have presented up to date MRI scans showing that his mental condition has severely deteriorated since April and this is being used as evidence that he shouldn't be given treatment, if his parents lose I would expect them to sue the hospital for preventing him from getting treatment when his condition wasn't so bad. In fact they might sue eventually even if they win because the whole court case has dragged on so long it'll undoubtedly have hurt the chances and extent of any recovery.

The medical opinion previously was that there was irreversible brain damage, when a succession of courts agreed with the hospital on what was best for the poor child. If the state is worse now, it isn't the hospital who have been prolonging the child's pain...

Minstadave · 21 Jul 2017 at 20:08

mmj_uk said:
I don't think the current court case is the last we'll hear of this, from what I've just read today the hospital have presented up to date MRI scans showing that his mental condition has severely deteriorated since April and this is being used as evidence that he shouldn't be given treatment, if his parents lose I would expect them to sue the hospital for preventing him from getting treatment when his condition wasn't so bad. In fact they might sue eventually even if they win because the whole court case has dragged on so long it'll undoubtedly have hurt the chances and extent of any recovery.

It'll be a total non-event if they do sue. They don't have a case.

GOSH asked the courts to stop parents giving inappropriate treatment to a child which would only prolong suffering. The court agreed at every step.

Psycho Ned · 21 Jul 2017 at 20:11

Indeed it's not the hospitals fault, they made the decision to request the courts to make a ruling on whether palliative care and withdrawal of ventilation rather than the experimental treatment was the correct decision back in April. The courts at all levels have agreed with this decision.

All that's happened in the interim period is a media circus has been rounded up and turned the whole affair into a big mess with various parties all with their own agendas (not all in Charlies best interests) muddying the waters and giving the parents false hope.

Destination · 21 Jul 2017 at 20:13

Dolph said:
The medical opinion previously was that there was irreversible brain damage, when a succession of courts agreed with the hospital on what was best for the poor child. If the state is worse now, it isn't the hospital who have been prolonging the child's pain...

Indeed but lets not forget the medically trained US senate and the chap in the US who wants 1.3M pounds to have a bit of fun with an almost corpse and write a nice article about what happens, surely they know more than everyone else because they happen to agree with the mentally deranged (not derogatory) parents and Tosno.
At this stage I am become closer to the opinion that the child's suffering doesn't matter anymore, as clearly no one cares in the slightest, so let them leave, let them pay for it, get it out of our hospital and our legal system where the monetary drain is frankly becoming ridiculous.
Hateful stance, but that's where I am now. Have they been getting legal aid for all these court representations?

omnomnom · 21 Jul 2017 at 20:42

I really feel for them and i dont know what i would do in that situation however...he isnt recovering and this is frankly cruel.

[FnG]magnolia · 22 Jul 2017 at 00:07

The Running Man said:
I have full sympathy for the parents but this is why the NHS cannot continue to exist as the costs associated with individuals cannot be paid indefinitely by society in cases such as this.

I had to read this twice to make sure I'd read it correctly. It wasn't any better on the second reading.

TJM · 22 Jul 2017 at 01:29

mmj_uk said:
I don't think the current court case is the last we'll hear of this, from what I've just read today the hospital have presented up to date MRI scans showing that his mental condition has severely deteriorated since April and this is being used as evidence that he shouldn't be given treatment, if his parents lose I would expect them to sue the hospital for preventing him from getting treatment when his condition wasn't so bad. In fact they might sue eventually even if they win because the whole court case has dragged on so long it'll undoubtedly have hurt the chances and extent of any recovery.

Charlie was never going to recover. He has been, and remains, terminally ill.

The best possible (and extremely unlikely) outcome from this experimental treatment would be a sufficient improvement in muscle strength so that he wouldn't need a ventilator while his failing organs and epilepsy killed him. GOSH is rightly opposed to such a futile intervention.

iamtheoneneo · 22 Jul 2017 at 14:04

Tosno said:
At the end of the day the only alternative is for Charlie to suffocate without dignity and get eaten up by maggots far too early.

This is very emotive, and I would say a stark difference to his ultimate fate. He is dead already, his brain is damaged beyond repair and his body is destroyed.
His chance for dignity happened along time ago but his parents decided to be morons and prolong any semblance of suffering this poor kid is going through.

Tefal · 22 Jul 2017 at 14:10

Sliver said:
Fortunately you are In a minority. If we don't stop making supercilious decisions without full or majority consent via our citizens, then nothing will change. Politicians always promise the world but most fail to deliver. And it's our fault for voting them in. Who here reads a manifesto in the run to the election? Indeed. Rhetorical points aside, the NHS is a cushion for those who would never be able to pay the opulent medical bills which you will be happily charged every time you get sick. Recently I suffered a minor injury which got infected and swelled up like a sausage in a tunnel. Alarmed I went to my GP and was given a course of anti-biotics, which are great. My iininjury is still healing but the swelling went away fast as did the bruising. Without those pills my infection may have spread and killed me. That's not hyperbole BTW, That's what my GP told me. The NHS are a national treasure. If you want to save money RunningMan, how about defence spending???

How does your case of some cheap antibiotics and a go vist cost compare to the astronomical costs of keeping a human potato alive?

Sliver · 22 Jul 2017 at 15:50

Tefal said:
How does your case of some cheap antibiotics and a go vist cost compare to the astronomical costs of keeping a human potato alive?

Don't be silly. You know the answer.

dowie · 22 Jul 2017 at 16:05

Sliver said:
Don't be silly. You know the answer.

I don't think he is being silly, without the NHS you'd probably still be alive regardless - it isn't like the rest of Western Europe doesn't have access to doctors and antibiotics.