NationStates

Purpelia wrote: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.

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

Datlofff wrote:This may sound cruel and numb. Let the fucker die. You could just have another. Donate his body to medical research so they can catalog and try to understand his degenerative condition better so that maybe they can prevent/stop it in the future. There is nothing else you can do. Keeping the kid "Alive" as a vegetable does nothing but help the grieving parents while wasting peoples tax dollars to keep a already dead kid "alive."

Rather tastelessly and harshly put, although not entirely incorrect.

Albrenia wrote:

Datlofff wrote:This may sound cruel and numb. Let the fucker die. You could just have another. Donate his body to medical research so they can catalog and try to understand his degenerative condition better so that maybe they can prevent/stop it in the future. There is nothing else you can do. Keeping the kid "Alive" as a vegetable does nothing but help the grieving parents while wasting peoples tax dollars to keep a already dead kid "alive."

Rather tastelessly and harshly put, although not entirely incorrect.

Im a very blunt and to the point person. I don't like to sugar coat things. The reality is the reality, put the kid down.

Purpelia wrote: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.

The NHS has a responsibility towards its patients. What about their rights?

---

Datlofff wrote:This may sound cruel and numb. Let the fucker die. You could just have another. Donate his body to medical research so they can catalog and try to understand his degenerative condition better so that maybe they can prevent/stop it in the future. There is nothing else you can do. Keeping the kid "Alive" as a vegetable does nothing but help the grieving parents while wasting peoples tax dollars to keep a already dead kid "alive."

It does sound cruel, because you called a sick little child a fucker for literally no reason.

This case seems pretty clear cut to me.

If the parents think the Vatican hospital can provide experimental treatment or even just better palliative care than the UK hospital, they should be permitted to transport the child to the Vatican hospital -- especially now that the child has been granted Italian citizenship.

This isn't even a question of UK medical resources, since the Italians are going to provide care for free.

It seems that the UK courts, as well as some of the people voicing their opinions on this thread, think the child would be better off dying quickly and that this should be accomplished by removing life support, such as food, water, and oxygen. I actually think this is immoral -- so long as the child can metabolize food and water, life support must be provided -- but even if it weren't, this choice is simply not theirs to make.

Parents have the right to make medical decisions for their children, for it is parents who are ultimately responsible for their children, who care the most for them, and who are closest to them in terms of authority. To make this right subject to some nebulous "best interest" standard as determined by the UK courts makes that right meaningless.

The state must only intervene in cases of abuse, and trying to obtain better care for one's child is obviously not "abuse". Those who made this claim on this thread should be ashamed of themselves.

Prolonging a baby's suffering so his parents, who have encouraged the doxxing of staff at the hospital, can feel better. Sympathy for the baby, no sympathy for his international coalition of supporters wailing on about death panels while threatening hospital staff who they label as "murderers".

Have to wonder what the plan was going to be for storming the hospital. Get the Pope to magically heal him?

British Empire wrote:Prolonging a baby's suffering so his parents, who have encouraged the doxxing of staff at the hospital, can feel better. Sympathy for the baby, no sympathy for his international coalition of supporters wailing on about death panels while threatening hospital staff who they label as "murderers".

Have to wonder what the plan was going to be for storming the hospital. Get the Pope to magically heal him?

The Pope's magic is powerful, but the proper donations must be made first.

It seems to me the parent's are in a spot of denial in their child's condition. Nothing can save him and your only going to extend his life as an inanimate object with no hope of regaining cognition ever again.

That said, if they want to waste money to deny the reality of their situation and take a vacation to Italy or the US, they should be allowed to burn that money.

I still don't know what call I'd make as a judge in this matter. Both choices seem so deeply... wrong.

On one hand I can get the parents pain and it’s horrible.

On the other from what I’ve read there’s no cure for this type of disease and it appears few survive it anyway, so why prolong suffering?

"Britain to cut off life support of infant Alfie Evans soon"

For starters, I don't like the thread title. It makes it seem like all us Brits are collectively in the hospital pulling the plug...

The child has extensive damage to his brain. It is debatable whether he is even aware of what is going on anymore. The only bits of the brain left might be the ones that control basic respiration and heartbeat, nothing more. Any sentience and sapience that the child had has been irreversibly destroyed. Let. Him. Die. Seriously parents, stop fighting this in the courts. Every court has told you that what you are trying to do is wrong. The parents brought in their own doctors to assess their child's condition, and even they told the parents that it was hopeless. It is time for the parents to stop being in denial, and face the reality of the situation. Your child is basically brain dead. He can have no life. He will be hooked up to machines for the rest of his days, withering away.

Also, the protesters have a constant vigil outside the hospital, and even tried to force their way in. That shit needs to stop. It is intimidating the other people who are trying to use the hospital.

Fun Fact: if the NHS Kills the baby the Italian Government can do them for murder

Kosernia City wrote:Fun Fact: if the NHS Kills the baby the Italian Government can do them for murder

Who's talking about 'killing'?

Kosernia City wrote:Fun Fact: if the NHS Kills the baby the Italian Government can do them for murder

lmao what

Kosernia City wrote:Fun Fact Fiction: if the NHS Kills the baby the Italian Government can do them for murder

Fixed that for you.

Valrifell wrote:It seems to me the parent's are in a spot of denial in their child's condition. Nothing can save him and your only going to extend his life as an inanimate object with no hope of regaining cognition ever again.

That said, if they want to waste money to deny the reality of their situation and take a vacation to Italy or the US, they should be allowed to burn that money.

Parents shouldn't be allowed to haul their dying child across a continent just because they're footing the bill themselves.

---

Kosernia City wrote:Fun Fact: if the NHS Kills the baby the Italian Government can do them for murder

You shouldn't tell lies.

Ifreann wrote:

Valrifell wrote:It seems to me the parent's are in a spot of denial in their child's condition. Nothing can save him and your only going to extend his life as an inanimate object with no hope of regaining cognition ever again.

That said, if they want to waste money to deny the reality of their situation and take a vacation to Italy or the US, they should be allowed to burn that money.

Parents shouldn't be allowed to haul their dying child across a continent just because they're footing the bill themselves.

I don't see why not, the child (as far as I understand) isn't technically in pain, it's not feeling anything at all. If they're going to make a huge stink about it, might as well let them bankrupt themselves and finally move on.

They cut off his support, the child's still breathing, and they still won't agree to let him live.

What the fuck?

Ifreann wrote:

Purpelia wrote: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.

The NHS has a responsibility towards its patients. What about their rights?

---

Datlofff wrote:This may sound cruel and numb. Let the fucker die. You could just have another. Donate his body to medical research so they can catalog and try to understand his degenerative condition better so that maybe they can prevent/stop it in the future. There is nothing else you can do. Keeping the kid "Alive" as a vegetable does nothing but help the grieving parents while wasting peoples tax dollars to keep a already dead kid "alive."

It does sound cruel, because you called a sick little child a fucker for literally no reason.

Yeah, it's a harsh and vulgar dehumanization, probably just because he's not a fully functioning human being anymore, but a half living body by this point.

Datlofff wrote:

Albrenia wrote:
Rather tastelessly and harshly put, although not entirely incorrect.

Im a very blunt and to the point person. I don't like to sugar coat things. The reality is the reality, put the kid down.

So, you are not an empathist, but a cold pragmatist who faced the truth and reality. Does that mean you don't belive in the morality of things, but just at the benefit and drawback of it, like international politics

Kosernia City wrote:Fun Fact: if the NHS Kills the baby the Italian Government can do them for murder

Not in any court on this planet lol. Space Pope will have to summon the galactic police.

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

Seriously? Trying to transport your child to a hospital that is willing to provide your child with actual palliative care (food, water, oxygen) is "child abuse"?

Kramanica wrote:They cut off his support, the child's still breathing, and they still won't agree to let him live.

What the fuck?

There is no cure for this disease and it seems as though he'd spend the remainder of his life in a vegetative or semi-vegetative state. Ain't much of a life worth living.

Those parents are too emotionally attached and are so irrational. They don't have financial sense in that they're expending too much money to try to save someone who doesn't have over 50% odds of surviving and thus isn't worth the effort. I'd let my child die in that scenario. If fate wants them to pull through, they'll survive and return to normal. If not, then it was never meant to be.

If the woman ain't too old, just get them pregnant again and move on. In the animal kingdom, it is said that runts are meant to be forgotten or dismissed. Focus on the offspring that is actually normal or healthy.

Auralia wrote:

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

Seriously? Trying to transport your child to a hospital that is willing to provide your child with actual palliative care (food, water, oxygen) is "child abuse"?

Keeping him alive at this point is just cruel. He's functionally dead, and he won't be getting better.
This is no longer about the child, it's about the parent's inability to let go and the Church taking advantage of that to push their agenda.

The poor child has almost no gray matter left. There disease is incurable. Even if they could keep puting them on life support, what then?

Spend the rest of there life on a bed?