Politicspoliticsalfiecharliegardukeuthanasiarighttodie

Mon Dec 11, 2017, 07:02 AM

Another Charlie Gard, Alfie.

Time and time again, despite not being diagnosed or treated for any suspected underlying disease, his seizures being somewhat controlled by a heavy cocktail of sedating drugs, Alfie has come back over and over from every infection and challenge. The hospital claims that he is “insensate” and unaware of any stimulus or irritation, which is proven wrong in hundreds of videos. Daily he moves, stretches, yawns, responding to tickling and noise and cuddling.

And yet even with all this, with loving parents (we are only 20 years old) who persevere through great strain and want to leave no stone unturned for Alfie, with support around the world, Alder Hey wants to turn his life support off. We have found another European hospital willing to let Alfie live out his life, and to try to diagnose and treat him. We’ve even been told several times by outside doctors that Alfie might even eventually be able to go home with a tracheostomy. Yet Alder Hey has gone from telling us they would allow transfer if a hospital was found, to admitting they would not allow any such transfer. The pressure by the doctors has been unrelenting and now they have resorted to legal force, to remove parental rights and end Alfie's life, when we were still willing to go through mediation to find a positive solution.

https://www.change.org/p/we-demand-alder-hey-to-release-alfie-evans-to-a-hospital-of-his-parents-choice

I think the UK is an unsafe place for children to be, at least their hospitals. If they can't diagnose something, then they won't allow anybody else to either.

And to you liberals who think he should be taken off, consider this. Should the government demand a parent do so? Put yourself in their shoes.

5 replies, 470 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 5 replies Author Time Post
Reply Another Charlie Gard, Alfie. (Original post)
southernwriter Dec 2017 OP
rampartb Dec 2017 #1
quad489 Dec 2017 #2
rampartb Dec 2017 #3
quad489 Dec 2017 #4
southernwriter Dec 2017 #5

Response to southernwriter (Original post)

Mon Dec 11, 2017, 07:43 AM

1. there must be some kind of economic vs quality of life consideration

doctors can keep most people "alive" indefinately.

approximately 1 hour after her savings, her medicare, her insurance, and evety penny i could put together was gone my grandmother's doctor told me "i'm sorry, mr rampart, there is nothing more we can do for her. " by that time she was 94. do you really think i could have done more?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rampartb (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 11, 2017, 08:18 AM

2. Thanks for proving those laughing at Palin's ''death panel'' comments were lying hypocrites.........

"there must be some kind of economic vs quality of life consideration......doctors can keep most people "alive" indefinately."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to quad489 (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 11, 2017, 09:09 AM

3. just getting this straight

you want a special ward at you local hospital where generations of your family can be maintained in vegetative state for centuries long after all of your money to pay for this is gone?

there are death panels meeting today, quad, but not in a government office where someone might be interested in keeping a voter alive. the panel meets at the blue cross office where accountants decide how much to spend.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rampartb (Reply #3)

Mon Dec 11, 2017, 10:07 AM

4. Cool story, but nope, my concern is future govt bureaucrats deciding which voters to keep alive..

..as people in this country demand govt health care. Countries with national health care systems already have govt officials making decisions on what illnesses to cover or not....doesn't take much of jump to envision any political party that would rig its primary processes from using voter data in making coverage decisions of voters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to quad489 (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 11, 2017, 11:00 AM

5. I have a fantastic idea.

This works in all strongly pro-life/anti-euthanasia countries (whether really capitalist or really socialist).

Respect life. Do not cut it off because insurance runs out or because it's considered to be a waste of government resources.

Don't cut it off because of a so called right to die with dignity and don't you (generic you) dare talk to me about the rights of the child and claim this is why you're doing something this barbaric.

Live above dumb ideology and life above money. Period.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Politicspoliticsalfiecharliegardukeuthanasiarighttodie