- 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: UPDATE 4/26 -Just In Case the OT Didn't Know - The UK is murdering a little baby right now
Posted on 4/26/18 at 9:58 am to TH03
Posted on 4/26/18 at 9:58 am to TH03
quote:
in the best interest for the welfare of the child
Starving him to death is in the best interest for his welfare? Welfare is pretty much the exact opposite of death.
1
Posted on 4/26/18 at 9:59 am to terd ferguson
I didn’t make any opinion on that. I just said the legal backing behind what they’re doing.
Like dirtymike said, legally they’re technically okay, morally, they aren’t.
Like dirtymike said, legally they’re technically okay, morally, they aren’t.
Posted on 4/26/18 at 10:02 am to TH03
quote:
I just said the legal backing behind what they’re doing.
I'm questioning the legality... if the wording is how you wrote it. I could understand if something was being done that could cause the child to die... like if the parents refused to allow surgery on a child due to religious beliefs. But this is a case where they are intervening and essentially killing a child by possibly starving it to death. That is NOT in the best interest of the "welfare" of the child.
Posted on 4/26/18 at 10:08 am to terd ferguson
Their flimsy legal justification was/is that the child is brain dead and therefore "suffering" as long as he is kept alive.
I don't think anyone is siding with the government here. But however flimsy and sickening their legal justification is, they technically have it.
They very much expected him to die when they turned off the life support. Now, they are likely sweating bullets with every breath he takes, because Alfie is slowly wiping away all of their legal technicality bullshite and exposing to the world their complete lack of moral decency
I don't think anyone is siding with the government here. But however flimsy and sickening their legal justification is, they technically have it.
They very much expected him to die when they turned off the life support. Now, they are likely sweating bullets with every breath he takes, because Alfie is slowly wiping away all of their legal technicality bullshite and exposing to the world their complete lack of moral decency
This post was edited on 4/26/18 at 10:13 am
Posted on 4/26/18 at 10:18 am to DirtyMikeandtheBoys
quote:
Their flimsy legal justification was/is that the child is brain dead
Didn't they say he would look around the room and that he could recognize voices? That doesn't sound brain dead to me.
If nothing else, maybe this case will cause such an uproar that they will be forced to reevaluate current policy.
This post was edited on 4/26/18 at 10:20 am
Posted on 4/26/18 at 10:24 am to terd ferguson
Is there a source for his awareness other than that random Polish doctor?
Posted on 4/26/18 at 10:25 am to Pettifogger
medically, not that I know of. There are numerous videos of him reacting to stimuli though. But some posters, who work as medical professionals, said that does not necessarily mean brain function.
Posted on 4/26/18 at 10:29 am to DirtyMikeandtheBoys
Yeah I know the photo/video evidence has convinced some people of that, but I've read the same from docs about why that might not be accurate.
Posted on 4/26/18 at 10:32 am to DirtyMikeandtheBoys
quote:
medically, not that I know of. There are numerous videos of him reacting to stimuli though. But some posters, who work as medical professionals, said that does not necessarily mean brain function.
It sure as shite means he's not dead so they'll just starve him to death.
Posted on 4/26/18 at 10:35 am to UpToPar
Yeah I’d be killing people to save my kid.
Posted on 4/26/18 at 10:41 am to Clark W Griswold
The dad may be playing it correctly.
Play nice, get him home, wait a day or two so the armed guards aren't around, and hop on a plane.
It's a fricking shame that they aren't allowed to seek alternative treatment under armed guard by the government.
How long does the kid have to live off of life support before they will let the parents decide anything for him?
Play nice, get him home, wait a day or two so the armed guards aren't around, and hop on a plane.
It's a fricking shame that they aren't allowed to seek alternative treatment under armed guard by the government.
How long does the kid have to live off of life support before they will let the parents decide anything for him?
Posted on 4/26/18 at 10:44 am to Mahootney
quote:
The dad may be playing it correctly.
Play nice, get him home, wait a day or two so the armed guards aren't around, and hop on a plane.
Exactly, I think his lawyer is advising this maneuver
Posted on 4/26/18 at 10:59 am to DirtyMikeandtheBoys
I just read that they are now doing bag searches at the entrance to the ICU so no one can bring in anything to help him. I hope everyone who is a part of this rots in hell.
Posted on 4/26/18 at 11:32 am to drunkenpunkin
quote:
I just read that they are now doing bag searches at the entrance to the ICU so no one can bring in anything to help him. I hope everyone who is a part of this rots in hell.
oh my god
This post was edited on 4/26/18 at 11:32 am
Posted on 4/26/18 at 11:33 am to DirtyMikeandtheBoys
quote:and Obamacare was a step in that direction for the US.
There was a law in 1989 granting that power to the government. It was discussed early on in this thread. Legally the government is actually in the clear, ethically and morally though that is a completely different story.
Posted on 4/26/18 at 11:34 am to drunkenpunkin
I think we need some sources for this stuff.
Posted on 4/26/18 at 11:39 am to drunkenpunkin
quote:My british friends are defending the UK.
I just read that they are now doing bag searches at the entrance to the ICU so no one can bring in anything to help him. I hope everyone who is a part of this rots in hell.
Brainwashed into loving the Nanny state.
They would take state healthcare over private any day.
They love that citizens don't have guns.
They think the NHS is a benevolent group that is always doing the right thing.
I was like. The government doesn't do ANYTHING better than private sector. Even with unlimited resources.
Schools. Post Office. Budget. Homeland Security.
Too much bureaucracy. Too much waste.
And now, this case highlights that they'd rather kill this kid than be proved wrong.
Posted on 4/26/18 at 11:43 am to drunkenpunkin
quote:
He once told me he loved me and he wanted me to remember that in case he went to heaven. He was 8.
Well that is fricking awful.
quote:
Fast forward 5 years, the correct diagnosis and treatment plan, and he is as healthy as he can be with his condition
And that is awesome.
I have avoided this thread for the most part because I didn't want it to piss me off. But it does. The fact that they can LEGALLY prevent these parents from getting the care their child needs and deserves is scary, and the potential ramifications in the future are downright terrifying.
Posted on 4/26/18 at 11:44 am to drunkenpunkin
What could anyone bring in that the child could eat? Or swallow?
Posted on 4/26/18 at 11:45 am to TH03
quote:
I think we need some sources for this stuff.
Agreed
Page 23 of 33
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News