Britain to cut off life support of infant Alfie Evans soon

[Luziyca]

This is one of those decisions I'd never want to have to make.

Prolong hopeless misery while upholding the freedom of parents to do anything they can to help their child, or end said misery by denying said parents even the chance to try...

Indeed.

This is a classic example of being "damned if you do, damned if you don't:" you can either keep the kid alive, thereby prolong his suffering and potentially diverting resources from an NHS (who due to policies of successive British governments has become increasingly gutted) from other patients who may have better chances at recovering), or you can cut off his life support, which would mean that the parents may risk losing him, but at least allow him to not suffer anymore.

But frankly, I agree with Albrenia, in the fact I don't want to ever have to make this decision, whether it be in the role of the parent, the hospital, or the courts.

[Dumb Ideologies]

Honestly we should have let them sod off to Italy a while back and stop wasting legal and NHS money trying to do the right thing and getting hammered for it.

[Empire of Narnia]

Where is Seal Team Six when you need them?

[Dumb Ideologies]

Where is Seal Team Six when you need them?

Wandered too close to the Canadian border, got clubbed to death.

[Chan Island]

This sort of thing happens every couple of years.

The infant is clearly suffering and has no meaningful quality of life going on. Keeping it alive is going to just make poor Alfie suffer even more. Not even mentioning how expensive the process would be too. And going to the Vatican- even assuming the child survives the ludicrous ordeal of going - would just have the little one sit in agony in a hospital hundreds of kilometres from home.

I think the court is right.

Where is Seal Team Six when you need them?

Oh my...

[The Free Joy State]

It's a terribly sad situation. I can't begin to imagine what the parents are feeling. I don't judge the parents for wanting to keep their child with them. But it seems to me that the parents are being used as pawns by religious fundamentalists who want a "win" against the medical establishment, in the hope of a miracle that doctors are certain will never happen, and at the cost of an innocent infant's wellbeing.

The child is suffering. He has a brain that is mostly water and cerebrospinal fluid. Areas of his brain have been "wiped out". He should be allowed not to suffer anymore.

I think the courts made the right decision, tragic as it is.

[Kistan]

My blood boils at the audacity of anyone to effectively murder an infant, but after stepping back for a bit, I don't think there was any real hope Evans would survive. All this does in the end is deprive us of a chance to help others with the same condition in the future and hurt the parents, and someone decided that that was better than hurting the child more.

[Vassenor]

Pretty sure that life support was withdrawn several hours before this thread was made.

[Empire of Narnia]

It's a terribly sad situation. I can't begin to imagine what the parents are feeling. I don't judge the parents for wanting to keep their child with them. But it seems to me that the parents are being used as pawns by religious fundamentalists who want a "win" against the medical establishment, in the hope of a miracle that doctors are certain will never happen, and at the cost of an innocent infant's wellbeing.

The child is suffering. He has a brain that is mostly water and cerebrospinal fluid. Areas of his brain have been "wiped out". He should be allowed not to suffer anymore.

I think the courts made the right decision, tragic as it is.

How could he suffer if his brain is just water and fluid? You need higher brain function to process pain. If they kept him alive it is still possible new advancements could allow a new brain to be grown or for a computer chip to be put in his head as an alternative.

[Risottia]

I can understand refusing to continue to offer life support, but why ban them from going anywhere else?

Because it would only further the kid's suffering while giving him no greater chance for a better health condition. The kid's right to freedom from needless suffering is more important than the (entirely understandable) feelings of the parents.

[The Free Joy State]

It's a terribly sad situation. I can't begin to imagine what the parents are feeling. I don't judge the parents for wanting to keep their child with them. But it seems to me that the parents are being used as pawns by religious fundamentalists who want a "win" against the medical establishment, in the hope of a miracle that doctors are certain will never happen, and at the cost of an innocent infant's wellbeing.

The child is suffering. He has a brain that is mostly water and cerebrospinal fluid. Areas of his brain have been "wiped out". He should be allowed not to suffer anymore.

I think the courts made the right decision, tragic as it is.

How could he suffer if his brain is just water and fluid? You need higher brain function to process pain. If they kept him alive it is still possible new advancements could allow a new brain to be grown or for a computer chip to be put in his head as an alternative.

... Because forcing a child to live a life with no hope of recovery and no quality of life, for the sake of some strictly hypothetical sci fi fantasy, is cruel.

The kid's right to freedom from needless suffering is more important than the (entirely understandable) feelings of the parents.

^ Also this.

[Empire of Narnia]

How could he suffer if his brain is just water and fluid? You need higher brain function to process pain. If they kept him alive it is still possible new advancements could allow a new brain to be grown or for a computer chip to be put in his head as an alternative.

... Because forcing a child to live a life with no hope of recovery and no quality of life, for the sake of some strictly hypothetical sci fi fantasy, is cruel.

The kid's right to freedom from needless suffering is more important than the (entirely understandable) feelings of the parents.

^ Also this.

You need a functioning brain in order to suffer. No pain or ability to think=no cruelty.

Also isn't fantasy, scientists have put chips in rats to remotely control them and other experiments have shown limbs can be controlled through artificial implants in humans. You could totally put a wifi transmitter in place of the brain and have either a script or a human operator control the body to some degree and as technology develops the level of control could become more advanced.

[The Free Joy State]

... Because forcing a child to live a life with no hope of recovery and no quality of life, for the sake of some strictly hypothetical sci fi fantasy, is cruel.



^ Also this.

You need a functioning brain in order to suffer. No pain or ability to think=no cruelty.

Also isn't fantasy, scientists have put chips in rats to remotely control them and other experiments have shown limbs can be controlled through artificial implants in humans. You could totally put a wifi transmitter in place of the brain and have either a script or a human operator control the body to some degree and as technology develops the level of control could become more advanced.

Actually, his most significant response was to pain, including painful seizures. I've been following the case. Also, life support is inherently painful for children.

So, he does feel pain!

And you propose keeping him alive, making him suffer, in the hope of putting a transmitter in his head and -- what? -- turning him into the human equivalent of some battery-operated toy car!

To keep a sick, suffering child alive for someone else's happiness is cruelty. And selfishness!

EDIT: I appreciate and sympathise with the parents' viewpoint, but not with the people using them and Alfie to push their agendas.

[Chan Island]

... Because forcing a child to live a life with no hope of recovery and no quality of life, for the sake of some strictly hypothetical sci fi fantasy, is cruel.



^ Also this.

You need a functioning brain in order to suffer. No pain or ability to think=no cruelty.

Also isn't fantasy, scientists have put chips in rats to remotely control them and other experiments have shown limbs can be controlled through artificial implants in humans. You could totally put a wifi transmitter in place of the brain and have either a script or a human operator control the body to some degree and as technology develops the level of control could become more advanced.

Isn't that just the most horrifying image ...

Also, you need higher brain functions to process pain, true, but if the brain is so broken as to not even process pain anymore, then we are dealing with an individual who is practically dead already. And the fact of the matter is that the technology to make the child recover in many meaningful way simply does not exist at present and does not look set to exist in the very near future. Making the child live in such a frankly undignified way as you propose is not quality of life- it's no life at all.

My blood boils at the audacity of anyone to effectively murder an infant, but after stepping back for a bit, I don't think there was any real hope Evans would survive. All this does in the end is deprive us of a chance to help others with the same condition in the future and hurt the parents, and someone decided that that was better than hurting the child more.

Glad to see you decided to look at this situation rationally.

Personally I just feel sadness, unending sadness at the injustice and cruelty of an uncaring world. To inflict such a terrible medication condition on an infant, while monsters die of old age in contentment and idiots rule most governments in the world... it's simply depressing all around.

[Alvecia]

I side with the hospital on this one. Moving the kid does nothing for him. It's purely for the benefit of the parents.

[Western-Ukraine]

The prospect of the brain tissue regenerating and healing is ignored here. Now, I do not know the extent of degeneration in this medical case, but it is a possibility. That is, if Alfie is kept alive long enough to find the right treatment. Not to mention that if the poor child has the ability to process pain, he has to have a lot more than just "water and cerebrospinal fluid" left. I can't believe hope is given up so soon, when I trust a lot is being done to ease his suffering while looking for alternatives.

[The Free Joy State]

The prospect of the brain tissue regenerating and healing is ignored here. Now, I do not know the extent of degeneration in this medical case, but it is a possibility. That is, if Alfie is kept alive long enough to find the right treatment. Not to mention that if the poor child has the ability to process pain, he has to have a lot more than just "water and cerebrospinal fluid" left. I can't believe hope is given up so soon, when I trust a lot is being done to ease his suffering while looking for alternatives.

It isn't "so soon". It started in July 2016. By November 2016, his brain functioning was that of a 6 week infant, and he has apparently degenerated since. (EDIT: As of January 2017 his EEG was "essentially flat" except during a seizure.)

It's really tragic, but Alder Hey didn't just give up on him.

[Alvecia]

The prospect of the brain tissue regenerating and healing is ignored here. Now, I do not know the extent of degeneration in this medical case, but it is a possibility. That is, if Alfie is kept alive long enough to find the right treatment. Not to mention that if the poor child has the ability to process pain, he has to have a lot more than just "water and cerebrospinal fluid" left. I can't believe hope is given up so soon, when I trust a lot is being done to ease his suffering while looking for alternatives.

And how much pain is accceptable? And for how much functionality? Cause the idea that they might torture this poor kid for the next couple decades only to gain a miniscule increase in brain activity to me is completely inhumane.

[Esternial]

If it were another condition and the parents would want to take their child to do a treatment that would endanger its well-being, child services would get involved, wouldn't it?

Given the extent of damage this illness has already inflicted on the kid's brain, keeping him "alive" seems abusive.

I mean, what can they do in Italy? Is there some experimental treatment there?

[The Free Joy State]

If it were another condition and the parents would want to take their child to do a treatment that would endanger its well-being, child services would get involved, wouldn't it?

Given the extent of damage this illness has already inflicted on the kid's brain, keeping him "alive" seems abusive.

I mean, what can they do in Italy? Is there some experimental treatment there?

I believe Italy would continue to give the same life support he'd been receiving at Alder Hey (until it was switched off). There's no other option.

[Alvecia]

If it were another condition and the parents would want to take their child to do a treatment that would endanger its well-being, child services would get involved, wouldn't it?

Given the extent of damage this illness has already inflicted on the kid's brain, keeping him "alive" seems abusive.

I mean, what can they do in Italy? Is there some experimental treatment there?

There's a fairly successful childrens hospital that claims to have some experimental treatments it can try.

However it's also greatly funded by the Vatican. It's basically a church.
Albiet one that actually serves as a functional pediatrics hospital.

It does however mean that their motivations are particularly suspect given the stance of the Church when it comes to stuff like letting sick people die.

Edit: I think this BBC article has the better summary

[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.

[Albrenia]

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.

Considering what's best for a child above and beyond a parent's wishes is degeneracy now?

This case is a tough one, but it's not 'degeneracy'.

[Greater Germany]

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 sympathize with your viewpoint, but you don't suppose even if the parents do have rights over their child that their judgement is being clouded by their grief?

[Datlofff]

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."