PDA

View Full Version : Charlie Gard - Government over-reach; takes a village bullshit



darin
07-14-2017, 06:32 AM
I probably would allow my son to pass-away in this case - but when I see the Government over-reach...this is tyranny actually...and people seem okay with this stuff?

Government needs to back off and let these parents keep trying. This kinda stuff - it's the kindling for revolutions...I hope.



July 10, 2017 (HLI) – The case of baby Charlie Gard has the gravest consequences for the rights of parents and the autonomy of the family. This assault against the family and life stretches beyond the borders of the UK, and we should all be very concerned.

For those unfamiliar with the case in question, Charlie Gard was born in the UK in 2016 with mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome, a severe condition that left him struggling for his life. This past March doctors told his parents that there was nothing more they could do. They recommended removing his ventilator and letting him die.

Undeterred, Chris Gard and Connie Yates searched for alternatives. They discovered an experimental treatment that offered the small possibility of a cure. The catch? It’s extremely expensive, and is only offered in the United States.

Still undeterred, Charlie’s parents launched an online crowd-funding campaign and received tens of thousands of donations. In all, the parents raised over 1.3 million British pounds (nearly $1.7 million U.S.) – more than enough to pay for the treatment.

For the first time, there was a glimmer of hope for Charlie.

Then, inexplicably, the hospital where Charlie is being kept – Great Ormond Street Hospital in London – refused to release Charlie. They said they had determined that the proposed treatment was unlikely to help the boy, and would only prolong his suffering.


The injustice is that Charlie will die when the hospital administration wants, and where the hospital administration wants. His parents have been deprived of their right to supervise his case. They could not take him the U.S. for experimental treatment. They could not take him home, to die in peace. As one of our readers observed, Charlie was essentially kidnapped, so that the authorities would be sure that he died on schedule.

The Catholic Church has always defended the primary rights of parents over the welfare and education of their children. Wherever those rights have been eroded, totalitarianism has not been far behind.

Indeed, it is no accident that Communism, Fascism, and other totalitarian ideologies have always sought first to sever the bond between parents and children. Once the family has been dismantled, it is an easy matter for the totalitarian state to fill the void.

The hospital and the courts may believe that they are doing what is best for Charlie. But in reality, their actions are at root totalitarian. They have robbed the parents of their natural rights, and set the state up instead as the final arbiter of life and death.
(emphasis mine -dmp)

https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/charlie-gard-case-an-attack-on-the-family-that-should-concern-everyone

darin
07-14-2017, 06:39 AM
Thinking aloud...

I think there's not much I would do to protect my kid from government bullshit. I really would love to see this kid smuggled out of the country and brought to a free land. :(

pete311
07-14-2017, 08:10 AM
Even the US doctors agree the treatment would not reverse his brain damage
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-40554462

darin
07-14-2017, 08:13 AM
Even the US doctors agree the treatment would not reverse his brain damage
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-40554462

And some doctors think there's the chance to help the kid.

But fuck "doctors" and "the government" - this choice is the parents' choice alone. Anything else is immoral.

pete311
07-14-2017, 08:27 AM
And some doctors think there's the chance to help the kid.

But fuck "doctors" and "the government" - this choice is the parents' choice alone. Anything else is immoral.

No you don't understand, THE doctor offering the treatment says it won't help. I'd say keeping the poor boy suffering is immoral.

darin
07-14-2017, 08:28 AM
No you don't understand, THE doctor offering the treatment says it won't help. I'd say keeping the poor boy suffering is immoral.

You don't understand. OTHER doctors think there's a chance. I'd say keeping the poor boy suffering is immoral too - but it's not my say. It's the parents' say. That's the whole point. The entire point.

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot
07-14-2017, 08:29 AM
Even the US doctors agree the treatment would not reverse his brain damage
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-40554462

Parental rights trump all of that.....
You can bet your last dollar if this was the child of SAUDI PRINCE THERE IN THE UK, or a high born wealthy brit citizen this hospital decision to kidnap that child would not have been made.
DMP IS CORRECT ITS IS TOTALITARIANISM ON DISPLAY..
YET YOU SEEK WAYS TO JUSRIFY IT--THEREBY REVEALING YOUR CONSTANT ENSLAVEMENT LEFTITST/LIBERAL IDEOLOGY, IMHO.

Did you give the Nazi salute after typing your reply?-Tyr

pete311
07-14-2017, 08:33 AM
Parental rights trump all of that.....
You can bet your last dollar if this was the child of SAUDI PRINCE THERE IN THE UK, or a high born wealthy brit citizen this hospital decision to kidnap that child would not have been made.
DMP IS CORRECT ITS IS TOTALITARIANISM ON DISPLAY..
YET YOU SEEK WAYS TO JUSRIFY IT--THEREBY REVEALING YOUR CONSTANT ENSLAVEMENT LEFTITST/LIBERAL IDEOLOGY, IMHO.

Did you give the Nazi salute after typing your reply?-Tyr

What don't you understand about the kid having irreversible brain damage?

NightTrain
07-14-2017, 09:16 AM
What don't you understand about the kid having irreversible brain damage?

What don't you understand about it being the Parent's choice to try?

It's not your choice, or the Government's, or anyone else's - only the Parents have the monumental decision to try.

Drummond
07-15-2017, 04:18 AM
Even the US doctors agree the treatment would not reverse his brain damage
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-40554462

'Sure'. That's why one is making the journey to the UK this coming Monday, intending to make the case for alternative treatment to be given a chance !!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40610501


The US neurologist Michio Hirano, who offered to treat terminally ill Charlie Gard, is due to meet the infant's medical team in London on Monday.

The High Court has resumed hearing a request to consider fresh evidence that experimental therapy offers a 10% chance of Charlie's health improving.

He has a rare genetic condition and is under the care of Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH) doctors who argue that his brain damage is irreversible.

Further tests might settle the dispute.

Pete, I know you're a Leftie, and that as a consequence you have faith in the State running peoples' lives for them (or even deciding the fitness of an individual to continue to live !!). But here's the thing. Individual lives MATTER, and it should be fundamental to all that's decent to see that the parents of a very ill child have every possible chance to look after that child's welfare, and without society removing rights which would otherwise permit that.

Please try to comprehend this.

Drummond
07-15-2017, 04:37 AM
No you don't understand, THE doctor offering the treatment says it won't help. I'd say keeping the poor boy suffering is immoral.

'THE' doctor, you say.

So, no other doctor, anywhere in the world, regardless of ability to help, should be taken notice of, and allowed to assist ?

We have had doctors here in the UK who considered themselves the only authority as to whether people should live or die. Let me introduce you to just one such example .....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/uk/2000/the_shipman_murders/the_shipman_files/611013.stm


When the police began investigating Dr Harold Shipman in September 1998 they struggled to understand him.How could a GP who was trusted and respected by more than 3,000 patients also be a killer who struck time after time with no obvious motive?

I'm not claiming that those currently keeping this child on life support equipment, but arguing for that life's termination, have records remotely like Dr Shipman's. However ... there's a lot to be said for keeping medical authorities answerable for the level of patient care they're prepared to supply. Here, we have a case of rights and decisions being taken out of the hands of a child's parents, with doctors acting as ultimate arbiters of a child's continued existence.

The State should never enjoy such a power over life or death. Not when there's the chance of a remedial alternative.

SMTA
07-16-2017, 04:55 PM
I probably would allow my son to pass-away in this case - but when I see the Government over-reach...this is tyranny actually...and people seem okay with this stuff?

Government needs to back off and let these parents keep trying. This kinda stuff - it's the kindling for revolutions...I hope.
That level of tyranny is quite stunning.

I had no idea it was that bad until this incident.