- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Euro Court of Human Rights: 10 month old baby to be taken off life support
Posted on 6/30/17 at 1:38 pm to LSU alum wannabe
Posted on 6/30/17 at 1:38 pm to LSU alum wannabe
quote:
Healthcare workers have a right to say no.
Huge difference between "No, I won't treat your child" and "If you try to go to someone who will treat your child, the government will send armed agents to lock you in a cage."
1
Posted on 6/30/17 at 1:39 pm to MSMHater
Was there an actual hospital in the U.S. saying they were willing to do this treatment, and that believed it could actually save this child?
MDS has no cure dumbass. It can be treated which would only prolong "life" for a short time
MDS has no cure dumbass. It can be treated which would only prolong "life" for a short time
Posted on 6/30/17 at 1:39 pm to dbeck
quote:
Charlie's father said in the video that they want to take their son home and give him a bath, cuddle with him on the couch and let him rest in a crib he has never slept in.
“We're now being denied that,” Gard said. The parents said hospital personnel told them they could not arrange transport for Charlie and, when the parents offered to pay for it, the parents said the hospital personnel told them that was not an option.
This is the outrage.
Posted on 6/30/17 at 1:42 pm to chinhoyang
They should be allowed to take him home. No argument there
Posted on 6/30/17 at 1:43 pm to rocket31
quote:
Was there an actual hospital in the U.S. saying they were willing to do this treatment, and that believed it could actually save this child?
Better yet,
The hospital also said it "could not arrange transport" for the child to the US.
Maybe there was no transport company willing to do it.
Posted on 6/30/17 at 1:44 pm to dbeck
quote:
The article makes it sound like the government refused to pay to transport to the US so the parents wanted to bring the baby home. The hospital didn't raise funds for that either so the parents raised the money to bring him home.
I didn't see anywhere in the article that said the government was refusing to allow the parents to pay for transport to the US.
No, that's not it. I've been following this case for months
Parents privately raised the money themselves for treatment AND travel to United States. Somehow donors saw fit that the treatment was reasonable enough to give them $1million+ dollars. Doctors said they have exhausted all options and the child isn't going anywhere. Parents appealed that, courts said no. Parents appealed to Supreme Court, they said no. Parents appealed to European Court for Human Rights, they said no.
Then the parents said they just want to take the child home to die with his family. Doctors said nope, he's gotta die here in this facility.
So just like Stalin wouldn't let Soviet citizens consume media from the West or they'd know how shitty the USSR gov't really was, now the UK NHS won't be one-upped by capitalist America either. The child has to stay here and die.
Posted on 6/30/17 at 1:44 pm to chinhoyang
Fine, but most people think the government is preventing the parents from paying for treatment. Mostly due to a poorly worded headline.
Posted on 6/30/17 at 1:44 pm to efrad
quote:
Huge difference between "No, I won't treat your child" and "If you try to go to someone who will treat your child, the government will send armed agents to lock you in a cage."
True. But I thought this thread was creeping toward these HC workers are heartless bean counters who just want to save a few bucks.
Posted on 6/30/17 at 1:45 pm to efrad
quote:
Parents privately raised the money themselves for treatment AND travel to United States
Got a link? I'm not disagreeing but it doesn't say that in the article linked in the OP.
Posted on 6/30/17 at 1:46 pm to rocket31
quote:
Was there an actual hospital in the U.S. saying they were willing to do this treatment, and that believed it could actually save this child?
Had a treatment, yes. Save the child, probably not.
quote:
MDS has no cure dumbass. It can be treated which would only prolong "life" for a short time
Don't deflect. That's completely irrelevant to the discussion. Everyone generally agrees the child is terminal. The UK's system (i.e. socialized medicine) does not allow for the hospital and its providers to accept direct cash payments. Which prevented the hospital from providing transportation services and continued treatment to the child. It was exactly the system, their socialized system and its applicable regulations, that prevented the parents from taking their child home or to the states.
quote:
dumbass.
Why you gettin personal, Rocket? If I wanted to know how useless marriage is, or what constitutes an alpha male in your opinion, you're first on the list to ask. But for healthcare, I'll defer to my own career and education. Don't be mad.
This post was edited on 6/30/17 at 1:49 pm
Posted on 6/30/17 at 1:47 pm to chinhoyang
Another wonderful example of a government run healthcare system at work. Well on our way to 1984 boys
Posted on 6/30/17 at 1:50 pm to efrad
quote:
Then the parents said they just want to take the child home to die with his family. Doctors said nope, he's gotta die here in this facility.
They just know the family will put him on a plane.
Still shitty though.
Posted on 6/30/17 at 1:53 pm to rocket31
quote:
Was there an actual hospital in the U.S. saying they were willing to do this treatment, and that believed it could actually save this child?
Yes.
quote:
After endlessly researching and speaking to Dr's all over the world we found hope in a medication that may help him and a Dr in America has accepted him in his hospital.
LINK
Charlie has a rare form of this disease and the treatment has never been used to treat this form, but it has been used successfully to treat other more common forms of this disease
Posted on 6/30/17 at 1:54 pm to real turf fan
quote:
What the Mother found is so experimental, it hasn't even been tested on mice yet.
it's already been used successfully to extend the life and reverse some symptoms of other children with a different form of this disease.
Posted on 6/30/17 at 1:57 pm to dbeck
quote:quote:
Parents privately raised the money themselves for treatment AND travel to United States
Got a link? I'm not disagreeing but it doesn't say that in the article linked in the OP.
I don't know the travel arrangements for getting to the U.S. but a U.S. hospital and doctor agreed to admit the child and the doc said he would have a chance with this treatment. And they raised 1.3m pounds (about $1.7m dollars) which should help cover whatever it takes to transport the kid.
Posted on 6/30/17 at 2:08 pm to efrad
quote:
I don't know the travel arrangements for getting to the U.S. but a U.S. hospital and doctor agreed to admit the child and the doc said he would have a chance with this treatment. And they raised 1.3m pounds (about $1.7m dollars) which should help cover whatever it takes to transport the kid.
Boom. So the parents raised the money, and medical professionals were willing to do treatment and a government and their courts denied a family the right to treat their child with money they had already raised? And now they won't even let him die at home? This is Hitler/Stalin level insanity. And many in our country would vote for this same type of sh!t system? Insanity. Feel the burn, baby.
Posted on 6/30/17 at 2:09 pm to efrad
From a BBC article:
So, apparently, the EU court did not want the baby transferred to America b/c they felt it would "continue to cause harm". Very 9th circuit"ish".
quote:
Judges at the European Court of Human Rights concluded that further treatment would "continue to cause Charlie significant harm", in line with advice from specialists at Great Ormond Street.
So, apparently, the EU court did not want the baby transferred to America b/c they felt it would "continue to cause harm". Very 9th circuit"ish".
This post was edited on 6/30/17 at 2:10 pm
Posted on 6/30/17 at 2:12 pm to Swagga
quote:
Can someone explain to me how a court can tell a parent their child has to die? I'm completely lost on this, maybe I'm retarded.
Posted on 6/30/17 at 2:19 pm to rocket31
quote:
The low IQs blaming this on socialized medicine.. Lol
I can't stop laughing
Is that because you don't have an argument?
Posted on 6/30/17 at 3:21 pm to LigerFan
quote:
Frick whoever is letting this kid just die
Socialist health-care.
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News