Britain to cut off life support of infant Alfie Evans soon

[Alvecia]

You're giving them far more credit than they deserve

I am merely saying that holding a rational opinion about a situation quite directly removed from himself is not a sign of mental illness, and to illustrate his point as coming from one is to miss it.

There's a difference between rationalisation and lack of emotion.
I personally would recommend the parents rationalise this scenario by considering Alfie to be just a

runt

and that

If the woman ain't too old, just get them pregnant again and move on.

[The Enclave Government]

I am merely saying that holding a rational opinion about a situation quite directly removed from himself is not a sign of mental illness, and to illustrate his point as coming from one is to miss it.

There's a difference between rationalisation and lack of emotion.
I personally would recommend the parents rationalise this scenario by considerig Aflie to be just a

runt

and that

If the woman ain't too old, just get them pregnant again and move on.

It's the same issue as deciding whether to save a mother or an unborn fetus. There's a reason even most mainstream conservatives advocate for abortion in case of the mother's health. Just framed in a different (admittedly more heart-wrenching) manner.

[Alvecia]

His brain shows very extensive damage, to the point that neuronal activity is non-existent in most of his brain. Brain removal was the closest equivalent that I could use.

He is not "just as human" as you or I, let's not kid ourselves. If sentience and sapience are totally absent, that means he fails to satisfy part of the definition of being human.

I personally mentally frame it as a poor kid whose just been in a car accident and is only living with the medics performing CPR, pumping air into his lungs, the shebang. Kid probably won't make it in an ambulance ride to the hospital. Do you put him in the ambulance and preserve a brain damaged husk of a human or let them go?

It's an ethical question solved by practical concerns, in my eyes.

Big difference here is that medically we already know that the kid can't be saved. The paramedics in your scenario don't.

[Auralia]

He is not "just as human" as you or I, let's not kid ourselves. If sentience and sapience are totally absent, that means he fails to satisfy part of the definition of being human.

One is not human because one is sapient; one possesses an inherent capacity for sapience because one is human. Human rights derive from our humanity, not from the fact that we happen to possess sapience at any given time.

Under your approach, human beings who are asleep, unconscious, mentally ill, in a coma, in a persistent vegetative state, etc. would be "less human" than other human beings.

[Ifreann]

The wishes of the parents quite clearly do not take priority.

Yes, they clearly do under the natural law, even if the UK courts refuse to recognize it.

Natural law is what people call it when they want to believe that their personal views are actually the deep truth of the universe.

He's receiving appropriate care from the NHS now. Removing him from that care to put him on a plane to take him to the Pope won't achieve anything.

Unlike the Vatican hospital, the NHS is refusing to provide appropriate palliative care.

I really doubt that the Vatican can offer anything the NHS can't. Except Pope magic.

[The Enclave Government]

I personally mentally frame it as a poor kid whose just been in a car accident and is only living with the medics performing CPR, pumping air into his lungs, the shebang. Kid probably won't make it in an ambulance ride to the hospital. Do you put him in the ambulance and preserve a brain damaged husk of a human or let them go?

It's an ethical question solved by practical concerns, in my eyes.

Big difference here is that medically we already know that the kid can't be saved. The paramedics in your scenario don't.

That works in favor of letting the kid go. Metaphors are imperfect

Personally I think it's a shame so many people have hyper-focused on this issue and not left it as a matter for the parents and court to deal with. From my understanding the parents probably aren't allowed to visit the kid - not with the amount of commotion and yelling that would inevitably occur. Not safe in an ICU setting.

[The Enclave Government]

Natural law is what people call it when they want to believe that their personal views are actually the deep truth of the universe.

Sigging for both ethical and legal implications.

[Alvecia]

There's a difference between rationalisation and lack of emotion.
I personally would recommend the parents rationalise this scenario by considerig Aflie to be just a

and that

It's the same issue as deciding whether to save a mother or an unborn fetus. There's a reason even most mainstream conservatives advocate for abortion in case of the mother's health. Just framed in a different (admittedly more heart-wrenching) manner.

All you've done is change the scenario. It's not any more rationalisation just cause the background is a bit different.

[The Enclave Government]

It's the same issue as deciding whether to save a mother or an unborn fetus. There's a reason even most mainstream conservatives advocate for abortion in case of the mother's health. Just framed in a different (admittedly more heart-wrenching) manner.

All you've done is change the scenario. It's not any more rationalisation just cause the background is a bit different.

I am attempting to point out that in most other framings of the issue, the answer is fairly simple. Emotional concerns are the only difference.

[Auralia]

Natural law is what people call it when they want to believe that their personal views are actually the deep truth of the universe.

Nope. Natural law is simply the structure and meaning baked into reality itself, accessible through the light of human reason.

I really doubt that the Vatican can offer anything the NHS can't.

Oh, the NHS is perfectly able to provide appropriate care to Alfie. They're just refusing to do so, because they want to ensure the child dies as quickly as possible.

[Alvecia]

Big difference here is that medically we already know that the kid can't be saved. The paramedics in your scenario don't.

That works in favor of letting the kid go. Metaphors are imperfect

Personally I think it's a shame so many people have hyper-focused on this issue and not left it as a matter for the parents and court to deal with. From my understanding the parents probably aren't allowed to visit the kid - not with the amount of commotion and yelling that would inevitably occur. Not safe in an ICU setting.

This particular metaphor doesn't hold any resemblense to the scenario.

The parents did invite a lot of the focus to be fair.

[The New California Republic]

Under your approach, human beings who are asleep, unconscious, mentally ill, in a coma, in a persistent vegetative state, etc. would be "less human" than other human beings.

Not at all. Most, if not all, of those cases have the potential for future sapience and sentience. That is the crucial difference. In the case of Alfie Evans, that potential is completely lacking.

[Alvecia]

Natural law is what people call it when they want to believe that their personal views are actually the deep truth of the universe.

Nope. Natural law is simply the structure and meaning baked into reality itself, accessible through the light of human reason.

Sounds like an erroneous application of meaning to nature to me.

All you've done is change the scenario. It's not any more rationalisation just cause the background is a bit different.

I am attempting to point out that in most other framings of the issue, the answer is fairly simple. Emotional concerns are the only difference.

Your different framings add and remove context that warps the answer. They are not analagous.

[Skylus]

Both my great grandfather and grandmother ended up dying on life-support.
My great-grandfather died of a heart attack and died right there at a rest stop when he and a bunch of family members were coming back from seeing my grand-uncle in W.V. This was...5 years ago?

Great-grandmother passed last year from another stroke, they think it was a blood clot that broke off one of her injuries (she had a huge egg on her head from when she fell) and it went straight to her head.
What's scary is that she was talking and then she was gone. Like that. She was around 87.

I don't want this to happen to anyway, but it is going to keep on happening due to people being selfish and believing even 1% that they'll recover.
When you are on life support it is over. You are dead. There's no reason for you to be hooked up to things to keep you alive when you'll never wake up again.
Why people can't realize this, I don't know.

(Coma patients do not count as they can come out of it at any time)

[Purpelia]

To me this is a clear violation of the parents rights over their child. And parents do absolutely need to have rights over their child because without such rights they can not be expected to fulfill their responsibilities toward it. So to me this is a clear sign of the, and I hate to use this word, degeneracy of western civilization.

I understand where you're coming from here but I can't help but feel mixed about it. Something about all of this whispers "child abuse" to me.

Not all parents prioritize their child's best interests, or simply don't know them. Either way, plenty of cases exist where parents are considered to be making the wrong decision for their child, resulting in an intervention by child services. These occurrences aren't violation of the parents' right over their child. This right is not absolute.

That's where I'll disagree. As far as I am concerned child services are the absolute best example of the state and government overstepping its authority.

Parents have extreme responsibilities as far as their offspring are concerned and thus they need extreme rights over them. There are very, very, very few situations where I would say that the parents have gone too far. And those are going to be things such as outright child rape, prostitution, extreme torture (like say poking their eyes out), deliberate starvation, shooting the child in the head and things like that.

There is basically no medical situation other than voluntary unnecessary surgery that falls into that category in my book. Like for example having your 3 year old forcefully castrated. So no, I would not say that there are "plenty" of such cases. But rather that the majority of cases are plain wrong and unjust.

For this, I'm leaning towards this being one of those occurrences.

Either way however, this situation really does not even warrant such a debate. I mean, look at the situation. Either:
1. The child can be saved in which case the parents are right.
2. The child is brain dead and can not be saved. In which case the parents are wasting money but are NOT wrong because the child is brain dead and thus they aren't hurting nobody.

Either way it should be their choice.

[Ifreann]

Natural law is what people call it when they want to believe that their personal views are actually the deep truth of the universe.

Nope. Natural law is simply the structure and meaning baked into reality itself, accessible through the light of human reason.

Grind the universe to the finest powder and sieve it through the finest sieve and show me one atom of meaning, one molecule of natural law.

I really doubt that the Vatican can offer anything the NHS can't.

Oh, the NHS is perfectly able to provide appropriate care to Alfie. They're just refusing to do so, because they want to ensure the child dies as quickly as possible.

Declining to pointlessly prolong his suffering sounds like appropriate care to me.

[Imperializt Russia]

If you guys didn't know, for the past months in britain there has been a case about a sick young child named Alfie Evans. Britain has ruled against the parents seeking medical practice from the US and Italy, and plans to let the child die without the parents consent. Some people for the cutting off of Alfie's life support claim that it's futile and inhumane, but in my personal opinion that doesn't justify barring these people from seeking further medical treatment, and that government has no right to decide if a baby lives or dies.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4312535/a ... -hospital/

So what do you guys think about this situation? Feel free to put your opinions on this thread

The medical team treating him has decided whether or not the child lives or dies. The government agrees and has ruled that it would be cruel for any other action to be taken.

Alfie has received an offer of care in Rome (and Italian citizenship, for some reason), but this is just more palliative care - what he's already receiving at Alder Hey, just leaving his life support on.
He can't actually be treated because no-one even knows what the disease is, except that it's a degenerative brain disease.
He also can't actually be treated because he has a degenerative brain disease, which has degenerated his brain.

If any part of his brain isn't spinal fluid and mush, it's the brainstem, and while your body can perform breathing and circulation with it, you literally cannot live with just a brainstem.
In his condition, it is likely he wouldn't even survive the flight to Rome, where the child's father is hoping to receive divine healing from the Pope him fucking self.

---

In the name of this child, an increasingly irrational crowd of people continues to harass and assault medical staff, non-medical staff at the hospital (I have one such friend), parents of other patients (who are also all sick fucking children) and indeed terrorising those other patients by proxy. Some parents have reported their children asking tearfully if the hospital is "going to kill them".
On Monday, an element of a crowd of 200 demonstrators tried to literally storm the hospital. A fucking children's hospital. Luckily it was a fairly pathetic effort that retreated as soon as the police formed a line at the door, but they fucking tried in the first place.

Very serious threats have been made to medical personnel personally, including phone, email and home harassment, as well as "supporters" trying to gain access to either the ICU (jesus fucking christ) or setting off the fucking fire alarms to force an evacuation.

---

This is the audience that Alfie's father has knowingly cultivated because he believes in the power of God over a medical assessment.

[Ifreann]

I understand where you're coming from here but I can't help but feel mixed about it. Something about all of this whispers "child abuse" to me.

Not all parents prioritize their child's best interests, or simply don't know them. Either way, plenty of cases exist where parents are considered to be making the wrong decision for their child, resulting in an intervention by child services. These occurrences aren't violation of the parents' right over their child. This right is not absolute.

For this, I'm leaning towards this being one of those occurrences.

I don't really see how that could be.

I mean, look at the situation. Either:
1. The child can be saved in which case the parents are right.
2. The child is brain dead and can not be saved. In which case the parents are wasting money but are NOT wrong because the child is brain dead and thus they aren't hurting nobody.

Alfie can't be saved, but does still feel pain.

[Auralia]

Under your approach, human beings who are asleep, unconscious, mentally ill, in a coma, in a persistent vegetative state, etc. would be "less human" than other human beings.

Not at all. Most, if not all, of those cases have the potential for future sapience and sentience. That is the crucial difference. In the case of Alfie Evans, that potential is completely lacking.

How do you know that this potential in Alfie is "completely lacking"? Because there is no known cure for Alfie's condition? How is it that a person's status as a human being is a function of the state of medical science at any given time?

[The New California Republic]

In which case the parents are wasting money but are NOT wrong because the child is brain dead and thus they aren't hurting nobody.

The problem is that they are, indirectly. So called "Alfie's Army"(!) have been protesting outside the hospital for weeks, intimidating staff and patients as they go to and from the hospital. They even tried to break into the hospital a couple of days ago. Hospital staff members are receiving threats and abuse from them as well. There is suffering being caused by what is going on.

[Purpelia]

I don't really see how that could be.

I mean, look at the situation. Either:
1. The child can be saved in which case the parents are right.
2. The child is brain dead and can not be saved. In which case the parents are wasting money but are NOT wrong because the child is brain dead and thus they aren't hurting nobody.

Alfie can't be saved, but does still feel pain.

Those two are mutually exclusive.

Either the child is brain dead and thus dead and cant feel pain or it is not brain dead and thus can be saved by definition. To allow wiggle room between the two and than have the state as the arbiter of said wiggle room is basically allowing the state to pick and chose who gets to die. Not a good idea, you must agree.

[Saiwania]

You appear to lack empathy. Have you ever been to see a professional about that? It's a common symptom of sociopathy/psychopathy

Getting bad results from being too empathetic will do that to you. I've become colder and more "cruel" or "heartless" over time for reasons.

It costs money, so of course I haven't. Being unemployed with little to no money, I can't well see anyone whenever I like, for any reason. The little money I do have, I want to reserve for my dental appointments. I'm "high functioning" in that no court wants to force me to do anything. I have no legal disputes or conflicts to date.

I'm not about to spend no $500+ to see some pHD crackpot tell me about problems I might or may not have.

[The New California Republic]

Not at all. Most, if not all, of those cases have the potential for future sapience and sentience. That is the crucial difference. In the case of Alfie Evans, that potential is completely lacking.

How do you know that this potential in Alfie is "completely lacking"? Because there is no known cure for Alfie's condition? How is it that a person's status as a human being is a function of the state of medical science at any given time?

Do you know how to rebuild brains that have been destroyed? No? Neither do I. And neither does anyone else for that matter.

The potential for sapience and sentience in the case of Alfie Evans is completely lacking. Accept it.

[Imperializt Russia]

The wishes of the parents quite clearly do not take priority.

Yes, they clearly do under the natural law, even if the UK courts refuse to recognize it.

The wishes of the parents cannot be superseded by the medical team, except when the wishes are believed to conflict with the actual patient's 'best interest'.
The medical team then goes to court, presents the evidence, and has their assessment upheld, or can lose and the parents have their wishes carried out.

If your child was dying of a preventable illness, even in the US, and you said "nah, we're waiting for God to save him", you would be charged for that on the same fucking basis.

He's receiving appropriate care from the NHS now. Removing him from that care to put him on a plane to take him to the Pope won't achieve anything.

Unlike the Vatican hospital, the NHS is refusing to provide appropriate palliative care.

He's already receiving appropriate palliative care. Palliative is "end-of-life" care.

The Vatican hospital is just offering more palliative care, except they want to just leave the life support on.

[Purpelia]

How do you know that this potential in Alfie is "completely lacking"? Because there is no known cure for Alfie's condition? How is it that a person's status as a human being is a function of the state of medical science at any given time?

Do you know how to rebuild brains that have been destroyed? No? Neither do I. And neither does anyone else for that matter.

Why do you need to? If his brain is destroyed to the point where he is brain dead than no procedure in the world will help him and it's just a case of the parents wasting their money. So let them waste it.

If you can't save the child at least you get the benefit of letting the parents feel that they tried all they could.