EUROPE'S UNIVERSAHL HEALTHCARE: Court denies parents self-funded attempt to save own son [progress]

lecter

not even webscale
@Silver
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
11,265
Reaction score
0
There’s a horrific case over in the U.K. that hasn’t gotten a ton of attention here, but it should. If we look closely, we may see our future — and our present.

Charlie Gard is a 10-month-old baby who suffers from a rare genetic disorder called mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome. It’s a horrendous condition that leads to organ malfunction, brain damage, and other symptoms. The hospital that had been treating the boy, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London, made the determination that nothing more can be done for him and he must be taken off of life support. He should “die with dignity,” they said. The parents, Chris Gard and Connie Yates, disagreed.

This is the very crucial thing to understand: they are not insisting that GOSH be forced to keep Charlie on life support. Rather, they want to take him out of the hospital and to America to undergo a form of experimental therapy that a doctor here had already agreed to administer. Chris and Connie raised over $1.6 million to fund this last ditch effort to save their child’s life. All they needed the British hospital to do was release their child into their care, which doesn’t seem like a terribly burdensome request. They would then leave the country and try their luck with treatment here. However slim the chance of success may have been, it was better than just sitting by and watching their baby die.

Here’s where things get truly insane and barbaric. The hospital refused to give Charlie back to his parents. The matter ended up in the courts, and, finally, in the last several hours, the European Court of “Human Rights” ruled that the parents should be barred from taking their son to the United States for treatment. According to the “human rights” court, it is Charlie’s human right that he expire in his hospital bed in London. The parents are not allowed to try and save his life. It is “in his best interest” to simply die, they ruled.

In Europe, “Death with dignity” supersedes all other rights.

In Europe, a mother may kill her baby but she is not allowed to keep him alive.

Again: barbaric.

I have heard many people rationalize this demented decision by saying “the doctors know best.” That may well be relevant and true in situations where family members are trying to force doctors to administer treatments that they, the medical professionals, know will not work. But that is not what’s happening here. The only thing these parents are trying to “force” the doctors to do is relax their grip so the child can be taken to different doctors in a different country. The doctors may be the final authority on what kinds of medical measures they personally should take, but they are not the final authority over life itself. It is one thing for them to say, “I will not do this treatment.” It’s quite another for them to say, “You are not allowed to have this treatment done by anyone. You must die.” The former is reasonable. The latter is euthanasia. This baby is being euthanized. By barbarians.

article: http://www.theblaze.com/contributio...-a-baby-to-death-this-is-socialized-medicine/
 
That seems fucked up but it seems to have more to do with the European Human Rights Commission than universal healthcare.
 
No baby deserves to die because of socialized medicine? seriously?

As fucked as this is, the kid was done, and even if he survived magically he would had lived a miserable life of suffering for a few more years.
 
No baby deserves to die because of socialized medicine? seriously?

As fucked as this is, the kid was done, and even if he survived magically he would had lived a miserable life of suffering for a few more years.
That's a poor way of rationalizing IMO. The parents should've been able to try out the experimental therapy. Those kinds of experimental therapies are exactly for lost causes like this. At the very least his death could've helped the scientists understand how to improve their methods.
 
No baby deserves to die because of socialized medicine? seriously?

As fucked as this is, the kid was done, and even if he survived magically he would had lived a miserable life of suffering for a few more years.
Totally irrelevant. Shooting somebody who suffers from terminal cancer is still murder if he doesn't agree.
If I actively prevent somebody from giving a medical treatment with 0.1% chance of success a try, I'm still the one sentencing him to death, independent from the fact that he would have died 99.9 out of 100 times anyway.
That seems fucked up but it seems to have more to do with the European Human Rights Commission than universal healthcare.
The article doesn't make that clear. The Court for European Human Rights was the last instance, they hoped they would overturn a decision by UK courts.
They lost the legal battle in the UK. And obviously, this decision has something to with whether or not you see healthcare as a service you pay for or as a matter of society.
 
That seems fucked up but it seems to have more to do with the European Human Rights Commission than universal healthcare.
This^
Also for every of him il bet u the u.s has a hundred denied cause of some b.s clause in their insurance
 
Not enough facts provided to form an opinion.

If the experimental therapy is cruel to the child and has no scientific evidence of providing any positive outcome, than I would understand the courts position.

What if the therapy was to remove the kids head and attach it to a dog. Are we to allow crazy parents to do anything they want to a helpless child?
 
The article doesn't make that clear. The Court for European Human Rights was the last instance, they hoped they would overturn a decision by UK courts.
They lost the legal battle in the UK. And obviously, this decision has something to with whether or not you see healthcare as a service you pay for or as a matter of society.
Okay I see your point. I would like to think you could have something like universal healthcare while also protecting the rights of parents to decide for their children in matters like these but I think your linking of universal healthcare and the encroachment on these parents rights isn't baseless. In a lot of LGBTQWASD circles there's a push to reduce legal barriers to children "expressing their true selves" via reducing parental and professional oversight on things like hormone treatment so there does seem to be this "greater good at the expense of the family" mentality among some on the left.
 
Okay I see your point. I would like to think you could have something like universal healthcare while also protecting the rights of parents to decide for their children in matters like these but I think your linking of universal healthcare and the encroachment on these parents rights isn't baseless. In a lot of LGBTQWASD circles there's a push to reduce legal barriers to children "expressing their true selves" via reducing parental and professional oversight on things like hormone treatment so there does seem to be this "greater good at the expense of the family" mentality among some on the left.
I just see it as yet another example which strengthens my belief that slippery slope arguments, in fact, aren't fallacious most of the time when the scope of the state is discussed.
If healthcare is a matter of society, if medical doctors are usually paid for by the state, if healthcare and insurances are regulated by the state, why wouldn't the state also have the authority to decide on philosophical questions surrounding the treatment of diseases?
On the other hand, if you accept that doctors are just people who offer their service to you because you pay them, the same way a tiler or taxi driver offers his service to you, and both you and the doctor share this conception of their relationship, how would anybody come up with the idea that a doctor could refuse experimental treatment by another legit medical doctor against the explicit will of both parents?
 
No baby deserves to die because of socialized medicine? seriously?

As fucked as this is, the kid was done, and even if he survived magically he would had lived a miserable life of suffering for a few more years.
Yep, good thing the family had someone else to decide that for them.

Death panels. Some of y'all owe Sarah Palin an apology.
 
No baby deserves to die because of socialized medicine? seriously?

As fucked as this is, the kid was done, and even if he survived magically he would had lived a miserable life of suffering for a few more years.


And this my friends are how death panels operate
 
There’s a horrific case over in the U.K. that hasn’t gotten a ton of attention here, but it should. If we look closely, we may see our future — and our present.

Charlie Gard is a 10-month-old baby who suffers from a rare genetic disorder called mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome. It’s a horrendous condition that leads to organ malfunction, brain damage, and other symptoms. The hospital that had been treating the boy, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London, made the determination that nothing more can be done for him and he must be taken off of life support. He should “die with dignity,” they said. The parents, Chris Gard and Connie Yates, disagreed.

This is the very crucial thing to understand: they are not insisting that GOSH be forced to keep Charlie on life support. Rather, they want to take him out of the hospital and to America to undergo a form of experimental therapy that a doctor here had already agreed to administer. Chris and Connie raised over $1.6 million to fund this last ditch effort to save their child’s life. All they needed the British hospital to do was release their child into their care, which doesn’t seem like a terribly burdensome request. They would then leave the country and try their luck with treatment here. However slim the chance of success may have been, it was better than just sitting by and watching their baby die.

Here’s where things get truly insane and barbaric. The hospital refused to give Charlie back to his parents. The matter ended up in the courts, and, finally, in the last several hours, the European Court of “Human Rights” ruled that the parents should be barred from taking their son to the United States for treatment. According to the “human rights” court, it is Charlie’s human right that he expire in his hospital bed in London. The parents are not allowed to try and save his life. It is “in his best interest” to simply die, they ruled.

In Europe, “Death with dignity” supersedes all other rights.

In Europe, a mother may kill her baby but she is not allowed to keep him alive.

Again: barbaric.

I have heard many people rationalize this demented decision by saying “the doctors know best.” That may well be relevant and true in situations where family members are trying to force doctors to administer treatments that they, the medical professionals, know will not work. But that is not what’s happening here. The only thing these parents are trying to “force” the doctors to do is relax their grip so the child can be taken to different doctors in a different country. The doctors may be the final authority on what kinds of medical measures they personally should take, but they are not the final authority over life itself. It is one thing for them to say, “I will not do this treatment.” It’s quite another for them to say, “You are not allowed to have this treatment done by anyone. You must die.” The former is reasonable. The latter is euthanasia. This baby is being euthanized. By barbarians.

article: http://www.theblaze.com/contributio...-a-baby-to-death-this-is-socialized-medicine/
Lol the blaze....


This might as well be fake news.
 
That's a poor way of rationalizing IMO. The parents should've been able to try out the experimental therapy. Those kinds of experimental therapies are exactly for lost causes like this. At the very least his death could've helped the scientists understand how to improve their methods.

Why? Parents dont own the welfare of the kid.
 
Yep, good thing the family had someone else to decide that for them.

Death panels. Some of y'all owe Sarah Palin an apology.


Liberals are great at lying about their agenda. Just like California liberals telling people "we aren't coming for your guns"
 
Why? Parents dont own the welfare of the kid.


You're not wrong, this is what happens when government controls your life and control the stipulations of your healthcare, they decide if your life is worth continuing. I hope the Single Payer crowd is paying attention.
 
Back
Top