UK Authorities Crack Down On Nazi Dogs And Angry Drivers While Forcing Parents To Watch Baby Die

originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
What starve him to death?

If you read the High Court judgment he'll die without a ventilator.

Maybe in Italy they' give him nourishment and pain relief,

I think that in the hospital adjacent to the Vatican they'll give him prayer. No guarantee that will work. That and hook him up to machines and wait until something gets him in the end and his body wastes.

Best let him go with dignity.

I am sorry, but this is a terribly sad case, but I agree with the Courts, and the clinical and specialist advice. I also agree with the principle of "dignity in dying", because a well manage end of life beats a crappy ending, even if it's hard to take that leap.

originally posted by: paraphi



Best let him go with dignity.

Please describe to me what a death with dignity is?

If I put in my will right now that I want to be kept on life support as longs as my family has a means to get it if I am brain dead, am I undignified facing death?

what makes the courts or you or anyone else the arbitor of some deaths being dignified, and other deaths not being so?

a reply to: Grambler

Agreed.
Silmilar the way it is right now is a child would be killed in Illinois because the state refused travel to say Texas who would be offering the parents a different option.
The UK is still in the EU, and there is a child with Italian citizenship (contrived or not but legal citizenship) who British courts order cannot receive care from the Italian health system.
Care which is perfectly legal in that equal member state.

...and I'm shocked some members here who I know are total pro EU are not defending the erosion of freedom of movement when another member state (Italy) is offering a different (legal) EU based option.

a reply to: CornishCeltGuy

It is very troubling indeed.

I know you are coming at this from more of an EU law angle; my concern is more that no state should be able to force a family to not be able to pay for competent care that the state is not supplying.

Neither of us are claiming religious reasons, or being fanatical; but that is how we are smeared.

So now that we have narrowed it down to the child needs to die with dignity, I would like an explanation for what that means, and why he would be unable to do that in the care of the Italian doctors willing to care for him.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: FatherLukeDuke

No having doctors save the life of a child and fight to do that is acceptable.

The principle is the exactly the same - the parents wishes are over ruled.

Having doctors fight to ensure that no care outside of them can be given to ensure the child dies in the menner they see fit is disgusting and wrong.

The medical team have reached the decision that any further care provided to this child will be pointless, and will probably cause further pain to the child. This decision will have been after days of agonising reviews of the patient's condition. Multiple outside opinions have been sought from external experts, all of which have agreed with them.

The doctors aren't "fighting" anything - the fighting is being carried out in the courts, and the courts have ruled that the hospital's decision was correct.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: ScepticScot

I share with you the story of American, George Pickering and his son.
www.nydailynews.com...

George III was on life support in January after suffering a stroke, and doctors had declared him “brain dead,” his father told Click 2 Houston.

Hospital staff appointed Pickering's ex-wife and his other son to make decisions for George III, and had alerted an organ donor organization as to his imminent death.

After the hospital approved a “terminal wean” — which slowly removes life support — George II decided it was time to act, he said.

“I felt hopeless. They were moving too fast. The hospital, the nurses, the doctors,” dad told Click 2 Houston.

To halt the process, Pickering grabbed a gun and threatened staff, demanding access to see his son.

Desperate, Pickering admitted he was intoxicated and being aggressive, but said he was certain there was still life left in his son and needed the time alone with him.

Although he was soon disarmed by his other son, he told cops he had a second weapon and closed himself in with George III as SWAT teams negotiated with him.

“The important thing is I'm alive and well, my father is home and we're together again,” George III told Click 2 Houston.

The man saved his son's life and was STILL prosecuted because "Oh by God we can't have anyone show the authorities, hospital, and law are full of s**t now, can we?" So it isn't necessarily the case that doctors would need to actually be shot... just the chance of being shot would pull them back and hold the cops off long enough to possibly save the life of the child.

Drunk guy pulls gun rather than explain situation to doctors or follow proper process. Good story...

Feel compelled to point out happened in US so kinda undermines the whole we would never do this in the American system argument.

Very few states allow hospitals to override parental choice where these issues are concerned. Texas only experienced this because the boy's mother had agreed to pull the plug while his father did not.

The "drunk guy" had tried explaining when sober... he was ignored. Good parents will stop at nothing to rescue their children, period.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
The "drunk guy" had tried explaining when sober... he was ignored. Good parents will stop at nothing to rescue their children, period.

Of course. However this child cannot be rescued.

originally posted by: FatherLukeDuke

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
The "drunk guy" had tried explaining when sober... he was ignored. Good parents will stop at nothing to rescue their children, period.

Of course. However this child cannot be rescued.

Yeah, they thought the same about that man's son...

There's a reason why medical blunders are the #1 cause of death in the USA each year. It is because modern medicine doesn't know their ass from a hole in the ground in some situations.

originally posted by: Grambler
I know you are coming at this from more of an EU law angle; my concern is more that no state should be able to force a family to not be able to pay for competent care that the state is not supplying.

We agree there, I'm only down the EU law route because it provides for Italy to offer that legal healthcare but a UK court is denying it.

originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy

We agree there, I'm only down the EU law route because it provides for Italy to offer that legal healthcare but a UK court is denying it.

Italy is not promising 'treatment' of any sort, only pallative care, which he is

already being given in the UK.

a reply to: eletheia

Sounds to me that Italy will provide fluids/nourishment and any required pain relief until he dies which he won't have in Alder Hays.

originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy

Sounds to me that Italy will provide fluids/nourishment and any required pain relief until he dies which he won't have in Alder Hays.

Can you provide a link to that?


That is what pallative care consists of so they are not providing anything different

to the hospital he is in here in the UK.

When a person who is seriously ill or dying does not eat, this is not starvation – it is usually a marker or sign that your loved one has entered the dying process. Starvation is what happens when a healthy person does not get enough food. When someone is very ill, the body naturally slows down and there is a gradual decrease in eating habits. Feelings of thirst and hunger gradually diminish. In many people, the stomach and intestines may not even be able to use the nutrition.


Some people are not able to swallow correctly due to illness. In this situation it is important to know that eating or drinking could cause food or fluid to fall into the lungs and this can cause pneumonia or problems breathing. However, if your loved one is alert and wants to eat or drink, the pleasure of eating and drinking may override these concerns. Discuss the situation with your physician. Tiny amounts of ice cream, ice chips, yogurt, Italian ices, and applesauce can usually be safely given - even to the sickest patient.


People who don’t receive food or fluids because of illness will eventually fall into a deep sleep and usually die in one to three weeks. This is the common last phase path for most dying people – whether the fatal disease is cancer or some other disease. The medical evidence is quite clear that this is a very natural and compassionate way to die.

www.cmda.org...



In my personal experience (and I have had a fair amount) there is no lack

of pain relief in UK hospitals.

a reply to: eletheia

No link sorry, just going by stuff I've read. Are you saying he'll still receive nourishment, oxygen, and pain relief at Liverpool then?
If so I see no need to go to Italy, but I support the rights of the parents to choose the EU health provider.

So Alfie is still alive 48 hours after his life support was switched off that Dr's under oath claimed he would be dead in minutes.
Tonight on Chanel 5 UK there has been a programme about another little boy called Noah, here in the UK who was born with only 2% brain. He developed hydrocephalus in the womb. He is now a happy 4 year old just like any other....because his brain grew, defying anything in medical science. Here is a link to that programme....
The Boy Who Grew A New Brain

Where there's life, there is hope......and sometimes miracles.

originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
a reply to: ScepticScot

I was asking you about the Italian doctors supporting the transfer, not any opinion of mine.
Please don't snarkily deflect, I was enjoying an interesting discussion with you. Snide comments are not interesting discussion to me so if you wanna go down that road just say and I'll leave you to it.

Was not making a snark response. Just pointing out this is a thread full of people trying to second guess the judgement of the those who have actually heard and considered the expert medical advice.

The Italians making the offer is completely irrelevant as they could offer nothing that wasn't available in the UK.

All that matters is what was best for the poor kid in question.

originally posted by: ScepticScot
The Italians making the offer is completely irrelevant as they could offer nothing that wasn't available in the UK.

Not true. Italy is offering time, compassion, and hope, three things clearly lacking in what the UK has offered.

a reply to: angelchemuel

Indeed there are miracles.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: ScepticScot
The Italians making the offer is completely irrelevant as they could offer nothing that wasn't available in the UK.

Not true. Italy is offering time, compassion, and hope, three things clearly lacking in what the UK has offered.

There is nothing that can be done in Italy that can't be done in the UK. The only question was should it be done.

If he is coming up on 48 hours with no fluids then he is approaching dying of thirst, that is a bad way to go no matter how you slice it.

People can claim death by dignity, or its a more humane death than keeping him on life support but the bottom line will be he was killed... by a doctors decision who supposedly took an oath to do no harm.

originally posted by: Irishhaf
If he is coming up on 48 hours with no fluids then he is approaching dying of thirst, that is a bad way to go no matter how you slice it.

People can claim death by dignity, or its a more humane death than keeping him on life support but the bottom line will be he was killed... by a doctors decision who supposedly took an oath to do no harm.

No he wasn't