A Parent's Worst Nightmare

This thread is based on a story from the Associated Press dated today, "Parents of ill UK boy fight extradition from Spain."

Excerpts:

LONDON (AP) -- The parents of a child suffering from a severe brain tumor signaled Monday they would defy efforts to force them to return to Britain, days after their family fled to seek a novel kind of radiation treatment for the 5-year-old boy.

A Spanish judge ordered Brett and Naghemeh King held for 72 hours while documents are translated and doctors are consulted. After that, the judge could extend their time in detention or release them.

The family had fled to Spain in hopes of selling a property to obtain enough cash for a new treatment in the Czech Republic or the United States they hope will help their child. Police pursued them and issued an arrest warrant on suspicion of neglect after Southampton General Hospital realized their patient - 5-year-old Ashya King -was gone, without their consent.

British authorities have made no apology for the warrant and travelled to Spain to question the couple. Assistant Chief Constable Chris Shead, of Hampshire Constabulary, has said he would rather be criticized for "being proactive" than "potentially having to explain why a child has lost his life."

. . . The father, Brett King, said he feared being put under a restraining order after he disputed his doctors' advice using research on the matter he gleaned on the Internet.

"They looked at me, straight in the face, and said with his kind of cancer, which is called a medulloblastoma, it would have no benefit whatsoever," he said as he cradled his sick child on his lap. "Well, I went straight back to my room and looked it up, and the American sites and French sites and Swiss sites where they have proton beam, said the opposite, that it would be very beneficial for him."

. . . Unlike other types of cancer treatment, it doesn't indiscriminately kill surrounding healthy tissue, so there could be fewer long term effects.

In Britain, proton beam therapy is currently only available to treat certain patients with cancer in their eyes. Other countries, including the U.S., Switzerland and Japan, also use proton beam therapy to treat cancers of the spinal cord, brain, prostate, lung and those that affect children.

Britain's health department announced in 2011 it will build two treatment centers to make proton beam therapy available in London and Manchester from 2018. Until those facilities open, Britain will pay for patients eligible for the therapy to go to the U.S. and Switzerland for treatment.

It wasn't immediately clear why health care officials didn't make this option available to Aysha.

What that story is telling us is that in the UK, the state is in charge of your child, not you.

In other words, in the UK, the state assumes that they know better than the parents what is best for a child.

So In essence, the state is playing God.

The laws may be there to protect us to some degree, but I highly doubt they will pursue charges once it becomes clear that dad is just trying to seek better treatment for his child.

If on the other hand they do pursue charges then that would be a bad sign and it may be a good time to challenge the States power when it comes to raising our children.

Can't wait to see how this plays out.

a reply to: Quauhtli

I don't see how following a parent to another country to get an explanation about what is going on is protecting a child in any way.

When we pay taxes for government services or when we hire someone to work for us, we should be in charge, not the government or the person hired.

a reply to: Mary Rose

What that story is telling us is that in the UK, the state is in charge of your child, not you.

In other words, in the UK, the state assumes that they know better than the parents what is best for a child.

So In essence, the state is playing God.

The thing is, it isn't just relative to the UK!

It is happening quite often in the US as well...

Hospital Holds West Hartford Girl For 9 Months After Parents Argue Diagnosis

There is an odd parallel as to what seems to happen in one place will soon happen in the other! Coincidence or Conspiracy?

You decide.

All of you need to be aware that Drs get their degrees in schools funded by bog pharma. These drs may want to help patients however, it is not in their education to look at ways to help that doesn't include the patient requiring a lifetime of drugs.

The gag order being issued is the most concerning. This family needs someone to help them with an attorney. The hospital has attorney teams!

The digital record change effects parents more than they realize. Everything you say in the drs office is now documented. And, you can't just pick up your child's chart and look like you could before.

originally posted by: seeker1963
a reply to: Mary Rose

What that story is telling us is that in the UK, the state is in charge of your child, not you.

In other words, in the UK, the state assumes that they know better than the parents what is best for a child.

So In essence, the state is playing God.

The thing is, it isn't just relative to the UK!

It is happening quite often in the US as well...

Hospital Holds West Hartford Girl For 9 Months After Parents Argue Diagnosis

There is an odd parallel as to what seems to happen in one place will soon happen in the other! Coincidence or Conspiracy?

You decide.

originally posted by: Quauhtli
The laws may be there to protect us to some degree, but I highly doubt they will pursue charges once it becomes clear that dad is just trying to seek better treatment for his child.

If on the other hand they do pursue charges then that would be a bad sign and it may be a good time to challenge the States power when it comes to raising our children.

Can't wait to see how this plays out.

Very well said.

I would just change the "us" (laws to protect) with "doctors or hospital" in this case.

The hospital does this to guarantee that if something happens to the child after the parents take it out against advice by doctors that the parents cant sue or hold the hospital responsible which would be rare but there are people out there that would do something as such, take a child out of hospital against doctors advice saying they (the parents) believe they could better treatment elsewhere only to have their child die or get worse and blame the original hospital or doctor advising against the action.

It will be interesting to see how it turns out.

a reply to: Iamthatbish

I agree with you that big pharma has an undue influence on medical education.

It is actually a conflict of interest to have profit-seeking corporations funding medical schools and medical journals.

Linked this in the other thread about 10 seconds ago.



B

originally posted by: seeker1963

It is happening quite often in the US as well...

Hospital Holds West Hartford Girl For 9 Months After Parents Argue Diagnosis

That headline makes it sound as if the parents were arguing with the doctors about the diagnosis.

But my interpretation of the article is that doctors were arguing with other doctors about the diagnosis. (DCF must be Connecticut Dept. of Children and Families):

. . . Justina was diagnosed with mitochondrial disease a few years ago. It’s a genetic disorder that can cause loss of muscle coordination and weakness.

Despite that diagnosis she lived a normal life.

But last February, she also got the flu and was admitted to Boston Children’s Hospital to see her specialist.

Almost immediately, a different team of doctors delivered a different diagnosis, questioning the original diagnosis of mitochondrial disease.

“They came in, and they said we cannot take Justina out of the hospital. They called DCF,” says Linda Pelletier, Justina’s mother.

They said Justina had “somatoform disorder.”

In short, they were saying she suffered from a mental illness, not mitochondrial disease.

Her parents, Lou and Linda Pelletier, were escorted out of the hospital by security, and within four days, they lost custody of Justina. . . .

And it seems that after that, the parents are then blamed:

“Due to concerns regarding Justina’s regressive behavior changes around her family, the multiple medical procedures and care episodes she has been through … and both parents’ resistance towards recommended treatment plans for Justina … a child protection team was convened.”

Before entering Boston Children’s Hospital, Justina was on several medications and had undergone complex surgeries. The Pelletiers say Boston Children’s accused them of “overmedicalizing” their daughter.

But the family showed Fox CT proof that every procedure and prescription was sanctioned by doctors, including Tufts Medical Center specialist Dr. Mark Korson.

Tufts wouldn’t let Korson talk to Fox CT, but the Pelletiers did provide an email that Korson sent to their attorney, referring to Boston Children’s Hospital, their team of doctors and the somatoform diagnosis.

“I am dismayed. … It feels like Justina’s treatment team is out to prove the diagnosis at all costs. … The team has demanded that Justina be removed from the home. … This represents the most severe and intrusive intervention a patient can undergo … for a clinical hunch,” writes Dr. Korson.

Dr. Amel Karaa, who works at Mass. General Hospital, says conditions like mitochondrial disorder commonly lead to confusion for health care providers. . . .

Since our initial investigation, we’ve learned that the judge has issued a gag order in this case.

The Pelletiers’ next court date is Dec. 5.

Dec. 14 would mark exactly 10 months since they lost custody of Justina.

This is probably an example of some official trying to play god. I don't think that that person actually has the right to deny the parents from seeking treatment elsewhere, but he thinks he does. I suppose he got others to believe he has that power. He should be removed from his position immediately. It is the right of the parents to seek treatment, not the government. The government can advise but not restrict if a person wants to do that. Now if the people are defrauding the citizen, that is different, but clearly this is not the case in this article.

Will it work? Who knows, but I feel the kid may have a better life if he survives with this kind of treatment.

originally posted by: rickymouse
This is probably an example of some official trying to play god.

No, this is an example of a very sick child having parents who believe that their internet research trumps professionals.

Regards

originally posted by: rickymouse
This is probably an example of some official trying to play god. I don't think that that person actually has the right to deny the parents from seeking treatment elsewhere, but he thinks he does. I suppose he got others to believe he has that power. He should be removed from his position immediately. It is the right of the parents to seek treatment, not the government. The government can advise but not restrict if a person wants to do that. Now if the people are defrauding the citizen, that is different, but clearly this is not the case in this article.

Will it work? Who knows, but I feel the kid may have a better life if he survives with this kind of treatment.

More like some doctor is waiting to write a paper on treating this cancer and is furious that his lab experiment has fled the country. Doctors have to write articles in research journals to show that they are keeping their skills up to date. So the establishment network steps in to back him up.

a reply to: paraphi

No, the parents' right to protect their child trumps anyone else's opinion.

a reply to: Mary Rose

This is why socialized health care is bad. The state determines what care you will get, and unless you have your own insurance that you can afford, you take what care the state will give you when and where they say they will give it to you no matter what treatments may be available elsewhere.

Did no one watch the vlog, the "FATHER" is giving with his poorly son i linked, does it look like that child is being neglected?

B

One would think that in a case like this where there is no cure that the state would take an "it can't hurt" attitude. Why the restraint from the UK?

Denying medical treatment a doctor deems necessary is neglect. The results may not show now since they just left medical care but who knows what that picture might be two months from now? a


reply to: BennyOj

There have been cases where that very decision has directly resulted in a child's death . It's a very fine line between a parent's heart and soul and a well educated physician. I hope never to be on that fence.



a reply to: Mary Rose

a reply to: AutumnWitch657

So, being a parent you are going to allow you're child to get his brain fried, just because a Dr, see fit, when the parents suggested alternate treatment but was refused,

As a father myself i would do what i think is best for my son and if I am aware that such treatment will leave my child a vegetable dam right i would tell them to piss off,...

B