Alfie Evans is fatally ill. Should he be allowed to die in peace?

[pongo]

10 minutes ago, Rog said:

In an increasing number of European countries he could / would have been euthanised. Check out The Groningen Convention.

In one country. Is one an increasing number?

[homarus]

17 minutes ago, ballaughbiker said:

Ok, that's a bit clearer, thanks.

Do you agree with Alfie's father that his child's condition has been misdiagnosed?

How could I know ? My point is the child has effectively been claimed as property of the state ,what gives them the right to do this?

It's one more precedent on a very slippery slope as I see it.

I'm not saying the medical professionals are wrong but surely the last word and any responsibility must lie with the Parents?

[RIchard Britten]

Just now, pongo said:

In one country. Is one an increasing number?

Rog revisionism strikes again...

[RIchard Britten]

Just now, homarus said:

How could I know ? My point is the child has effectively been claimed as property of the state ,what gives them the right to do this?

It's one more precedent on a very slippery slope as I see it.

I'm not saying the medical professionals are wrong but surely the last word and any responsibility must lie with the Parents?

What qualifies the parents to make that call more than the medical professionals?

[Rog]

7 minutes ago, pongo said:

In one country. Is one an increasing number?

More than one AFAIK so far it is officially an option in The Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg.

[Rog]

8 minutes ago, RIchard Britten said:

What qualifies the parents to make that call more than the medical professionals?

There's some sad times when it's unfair to put such a burden on parents. 

[Rog]

11 minutes ago, RIchard Britten said:

Rog revisionism strikes again...

Just check out the facts dear heart.

[ballaughbiker]

Quote

How could I know ?

Well I don't know either and I doubt that all those making a judgement in the absence of the full facts have the right to do that.

It's hard to imagine what his parents have gone through so far but it's clear that there has been a total breakdown in the doctor-patient's parents relationship. Given that they have lost every single court case, I have further doubts that the parents are right and the doctors are wrong but I think the parent's should have the chance of further treatment elsewhere even if it is likely futile. The only proviso on that would be provided the child is not suffering.

[Lxxx]

3 hours ago, Albert Tatlock said:

There are religious people that refuse blood transfusions to their kids.

It's their religion, not their kids religion.

In those cases I'm all for doctors overriding the parents decision.

Irrelevant to this case though. They just want the hospital to stand back now he is breathing unaided, which isn't unreasonable.

However this is what you get with socialised medicine. Once you walk through the doors of a hospital all rights for your child and it's wellbeing disappear into the hands of men and women in white coats. This wouldn't have happened in a private hospital.   

[RIchard Britten]

16 minutes ago, ballaughbiker said:

Well I don't know either and I doubt that all those making a judgement in the absence of the full facts have the right to do that.

It's hard to imagine what his parents have gone through so far but it's clear that there has been a total breakdown in the doctor-patient's parents relationship. Given that they have lost every single court case, I have further doubts that the parents are right and the doctors are wrong but I think the parent's should have the chance of further treatment elsewhere even if it is likely futile. The only proviso on that would be provided the child is not suffering.

Problem being, the parents are desperate for any kind of life line, from anywhere or anyone, regardless of its validity.

Apparently the parents have been given some iffy (and wrong) advice by a legal student.

"Parents" come with a built in sense of "being right" when it comes to children.

[RIchard Britten]

1 minute ago, Lxxx said:

This wouldn't have happened in a private hospital.   

Correct, it wouldn't have happened because the parents aren't the sort that would be able to afford private medical care.

[Lxxx]

6 minutes ago, RIchard Britten said:

Correct, it wouldn't have happened because the parents aren't the sort that would be able to afford private medical care.

Which is the rub here. Wealth enables you the opportunity to exercise more rights than if you're poor. If Alfie's parents were middle class lawyers they would have thanked the private hospital for it's time, paid the bill and taken him to another hospital for a second opinion. The fact Alfie's parents walked into an NHS state hospital signs means they signed over those rights to medical professionals. It's irrelevant whether those professionals have made the right or wrong diagnosis, it's their decision to make and socialised medical care means the state is right even when it may be wrong. Which is why he's not being allowed to go anywhere, there are precedents that may be set and consequences should the peasants revolt.

[RIchard Britten]

Just now, Lxxx said:

It's irrelevant whether those professionals have made the right or wrong diagnosis, it's their decision to make...

But the professionals have made the right decision, which has been held up in multiple courts.

Being a parent is not an automatic "I'm right" when it comes to children.

[woody2]

13 minutes ago, RIchard Britten said:

Problem being, the parents are desperate for any kind of life line, from anywhere or anyone, regardless of its validity.

Apparently the parents have been given some iffy (and wrong) advice by a legal student.

"Parents" come with a built in sense of "being right" when it comes to children.

they had a QC......

[homarus]

39 minutes ago, RIchard Britten said:

What qualifies the parents to make that call more than the medical professionals?

 A question asked like a true socialist but never mind .

  But in answer to your question , I'd imagine by virtue of the fact that they are the childs parents and legal guardians and would have the right to seek a second opinion  ? Which by the way is ready and waiting for them !