It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
So, now we've established that the law and legislation can be wrong and inhumane, I wonder why so many fellow Brits blindly have absolute faith in the decision of the court.
Exactly!
That is why the decision to seek competent care elsewhere should be up to the family.
44. Professor Haas was instructed by these parents to assist them and the Court on the basis of his experience and expertise, which is evidently considerable. It is no part of his function however to utilise the case as a platform for his own personal beliefs. I found the following concluding paragraph to be inflammatory and inappropriate, not least because the views expressed bear no relationship to and do not engage with the facts of this case. It would not be appropriate to edit them out of this judgment and for that reason only I set them out. I will address them below.
“Because of our history in Germany, we've learned that there are some things you just don't do with severely handicapped children. A society must be prepared to look after these severely handicapped children and not decide that life support has to be withdrawn against the will of the parents if there is uncertainty of the feelings of the child, as in this case”.
he is breathing
Parents giving baby 'mouth to mouth resuscitation' to keep him alive
Assisted suicide is illegal in the UK, even to someone of sound mind who wishes the assistance.
originally posted by: Xenogears
will allow them to have total dominion over the fate of other beings. Those beings will be even unable to kill themselves.
originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
originally posted by: Xenogears
will allow them to have total dominion over the fate of other beings. Those beings will be even unable to kill themselves.
Euthanasia is also illegal, but some say that witholding food from someone with the intention that they die is not euthanasia.
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
originally posted by: Xenogears
will allow them to have total dominion over the fate of other beings. Those beings will be even unable to kill themselves.
Euthanasia is also illegal, but some say that witholding food from someone with the intention that they die is not euthanasia.
Now I can see a better argument for saying that if the court or hospital decided thatbthey would no longer give food, that is not euthaniasia.
However, when they say and the family or the person may no longer seek food elsewhere at no cost to the state or hospital, that is where it becomes all the more reprehensible to me.
originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
But the court has apparently given the doctors power to remove nutrient supply (ie starve him) which requires medical technique intervention. I wonder if that has been denied to a private UK healthcare company if the parents wished it. They've got plenty of funding behind them now.
originally posted by: paraphi
originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
But the court has apparently given the doctors power to remove nutrient supply (ie starve him) which requires medical technique intervention. I wonder if that has been denied to a private UK healthcare company if the parents wished it. They've got plenty of funding behind them now.
The High Court has given permission for the child to die in a dignified and compassionate manner. He is under the care of the UK health service. Very doubtful that a private company would want to get involved in this case. Sometimes, money is useless.
originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
originally posted by: paraphi
originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
But the court has apparently given the doctors power to remove nutrient supply (ie starve him) which requires medical technique intervention. I wonder if that has been denied to a private UK healthcare company if the parents wished it. They've got plenty of funding behind them now.
The High Court has given permission for the child to die in a dignified and compassionate manner. He is under the care of the UK health service. Very doubtful that a private company would want to get involved in this case. Sometimes, money is useless.
You think starving to death slowly is dignified?
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Grambler
They enjoy their new daddy the state. They want him to provide, keep them safe, make the tough decisions and to protect them from the bad, bad world.
originally posted by: Grambler
Again I will ask someone to tell me to define what is a dignified death?
How would receiving care in italy be undignified?
originally posted by: eletheia
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
The facts i know seem to be something along these lines: parents have found alternative treatment at an approved EU hospital,
He has not been offered treatment. He has been offered palative care which
he is already getting in the UK hospital.
originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan
"but if he is off breathing/heart regulation and is living then no...he isn't dying"
But 70% of his brain is destroyed already and this will only get progressively worse.
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
a reply to: ScepticScot
Explain how?
A because a child with degenerative brain disease, from which he will never recover, has no ability and never has had the ability to indicate or even form a judgment about what they would want to happen to them. That is why we have a legal system to look after their interests.
Not the same as a granny who needs a home help.
originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Grambler
yeah dude again, not interested in entertaining your silly fantasy that its a crime to cause offence in the UK.
Your talking to a Glaswegian, offence is basically my first language.
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
originally posted by: Xenogears
will allow them to have total dominion over the fate of other beings. Those beings will be even unable to kill themselves.
Euthanasia is also illegal, but some say that witholding food from someone with the intention that they die is not euthanasia.
Now I can see a better argument for saying that if the court or hospital decided thatbthey would no longer give food, that is not euthaniasia.
However, when they say and the family or the person may no longer seek food elsewhere at no cost to the state or hospital, that is where it becomes all the more reprehensible to me.