Charlie Gard potentially granted US residency by congress to fly to US for treatment!

[Elegiac]

Actually, no, I do not, not if there is a willing and reputable medical professional on the side of treatment (which is the case with the trial therapies for the boy here). Because the public policy presumption on behalf of any minor child should be in favor of wanting to live longer. It's a lynch pin of a functioning society. It's the underlying assumption of everything from criminal law and tort to life and health insurance to good samaritan protections to implied consent doctrine, etc. The benefit of first, and probably every doubt, should be in whomever would prefer the patient have the best chance to live longer. If two parties are disagreeing only on how they have the best chance to live longer, I'd say it goes to the parents.

You honestly don't think all of this was taken into account by Britain's judiciary? Lol.

And, eh, y'know what, once you've nationalized a healthcare system, the caregivers are state actors, so it's a hollow distinction. In that kind of model it's ultimately impossible in edge cases to be sure that the choices are medical and not financial.

Unlike America's saintly for-profit system which makes such decisions entirely on the basis of people's ability to pay with very little regard for actual medical necessity, right.

I'm not sure they would even be eligible for NHS coverage under this treatment; the issue at hand is not the financial liability, in any case.

[Wyrt]

Actually, no, I do not, not if there is a willing and reputable medical professional on the side of treatment (which is the case with the trial therapies for the boy here). Because the public policy presumption on behalf of any minor child should be in favor of wanting to live longer. It's a lynch pin of a functioning society. It's the underlying assumption of everything from criminal law and tort to life and health insurance to good samaritan protections to implied consent doctrine, etc. The benefit of first, and probably every doubt, should be in whomever would prefer the patient have the best chance to live longer. If two parties are disagreeing only on how they have the best chance to live longer, I'd say it goes to the parents.

And, eh, y'know what, once you've nationalized a healthcare system, the caregivers are state actors, so it's a hollow distinction. In that kind of model it's ultimately impossible in edge cases to be sure that the choices are medical and not financial.

Except, you know, the "treatment' was only going to prolong his suffering by a few months. And that's IF it worked. It was a completely experimental procedure that had never been tested before. Torturing the kid for a few extra months isn't beneficial to anyone.

The parents were irrational, the doctors made the call and the court system backed the doctors based on evidence, not feelings. Parents do not own their children.

[Elegiac]

There's no "we", seeing as a small army of voluntary contributors had that handled.

I always find it peculiar how many people assume it's "better" for healthcare to be funded by involuntary contribution over voluntary contribution. Like, people talk down to people who rely on a gofundme for major medical, like somehow it's more just if instead of taking money from those willing to give it specifically to them out of compassion, that it be paid with money simply taken from others with no input.

Largely because voluntary charity entails a loss of dignity as its entirely contingent on whether or not the donor deems the recipient sufficiently virtuous. As evidenced by the fact the money raised was from the usual gallery of women hating anti-choice folks who wouldn't lift a finger to help an unwed teenage mother.

[Deleted]

Actually, no, I do not, not if there is a willing and reputable medical professional on the side of treatment (which is the case with the trial therapies for the boy here). Because the public policy presumption on behalf of any minor child should be in favor of wanting to live longer. It's a lynch pin of a functioning society. It's the underlying assumption of everything from criminal law and tort to life and health insurance to good samaritan protections to implied consent doctrine, etc. The benefit of first, and probably every doubt, should be in whomever would prefer the patient have the best chance to live longer. If two parties are disagreeing only on how they have the best chance to live longer, I'd say it goes to the parents.

And, eh, y'know what, once you've nationalized a healthcare system, the caregivers are state actors, so it's a hollow distinction. In that kind of model it's ultimately impossible in edge cases to be sure that the choices are medical and not financial.

This is nonsense.

The medical professional on the side of treatment hadn't even examined the child when he said he could help.

Its nonsense that they are letting him die for financial reasons.

[Shadowmelded]

Actually, no, I do not, not if there is a willing and reputable medical professional on the side of treatment (which is the case with the trial therapies for the boy here).

A reputable medical professional who hadn't examined the patient or even looked at his medical records? One who has a financial interest in the treatment?

Because the public policy presumption on behalf of any minor child should be in favor of wanting to live longer.

Quality of life be damned.

And, eh, y'know what, once you've nationalized a healthcare system, the caregivers are state actors, so it's a hollow distinction. In that kind of model it's ultimately impossible in edge cases to be sure that the choices are medical and not financial.

Maybe if you're paranoid. Were all of the doctors and experts (from all over the world, not just the UK) in on it? Did they fabricate the scan results?

[Dhrizzle]

Actually, no, I do not, not if there is a willing and reputable medical professional on the side of treatment (which is the case with the trial therapies for the boy here).

Which is one professional across an ocean disagreeing with a team of professionals personally interacting and treating Charlie.

Because the public policy presumption on behalf of any minor child should be in favor of wanting to live longer.

Not if prolonging the life would lead to undue suffering with a declining quality of life.

And, eh, y'know what, once you've nationalized a healthcare system, the caregivers are state actors, so it's a hollow distinction. In that kind of model it's ultimately impossible in edge cases to be sure that the choices are medical and not financial.

How exactly is fighting a long and costly legal battle a better financial decision than allowing the parents to take the child out of the hospital's jurisdiction? How do you know that institutions looking to profit from providing treatment aren't making decisions based on financial rather than medical matters?

[Masark]

Which is one professional across an ocean disagreeing with a team of professionals personally interacting and treating Charlie.

And a professional who has a previously-undisclosed financial stake in the company developing said treatment.

[Deleted]

Wow nice to see American medicine trying to help :

“[Dr Hirano] stated that not only had he not visited the hospital to examine Charlie but in addition, he had not read Charlie’s contemporaneous medical records or viewed Charlie’s brain imaging or read all of the second opinions about Charlie’s condition (obtained from experts all of whom had taken the opportunity to examine him and consider his records) or even read the Judge’s decision made on 11 April,”

“Further, GOSH was concerned to hear the Professor state, for the first time, whilst in the witness box, that he retains a financial interest in some of the NBT compounds he proposed prescribing for Charlie.”


Jog on cunt.

[Xandrigity]

This Hirano dude gave the parents a lot of false hope without him even visiting or reviewing Charlie's case. Ofc the media distorting the facts didn't help. It was so sad it came down to this, even worse that is became so public. The doctor sounds like a complete asshat, I hope he gets fired.

[Puremallace]

Just want to thank the UK for killing ANY CHANCE ever that US would get single payer thanks to this bullshit you guys just pulled.

This Hirano dude gave the parents a lot of false hope without him even visiting or reviewing Charlie's case. Ofc the media distorting the facts didn't help. It was so sad it came down to this, even worse that is became so public. The doctor sounds like a complete asshat, I hope he gets fired.

The issue from an American perspective is the state effectively took custody of this kid from his parents and denied him care no matter how experimental.

[Elegiac]

Just want to thank the UK for killing ANY CHANCE ever that US would get single payer thanks to this bullshit you guys just pulled.

Um, what?

If anything this is an indictment of shitheaded medical professionals putting their financial incentives above sound medical advice, by which I mean Dr. Hirano.

[Puremallace]

Um, what?

If anything this is an indictment of shitheaded medical professionals putting their financial incentives above sound medical advice, by which I mean Dr. Hirano.

Well here in America Nigel Farage the running joke in the UK is a Fox News contributor and he just convinced half this country that the UK killed that kid. Republicans over here are already pointing to this case as clear evidence that single payer means giving up your rights to the government.

So yeah this doctor might have been a fuck twad but this is just bad.

[Elegiac]

Well here in America Nigel Farage the running joke in the UK is a Fox News contributor and he just convinced half this country that the UK killed that kid. Republicans over here are already pointing to this case as clear evidence that single payer means giving up your rights to the government.

So yeah this doctor might have been a fuck twad but this is just bad.

Your point being what? The only people who will actually believe that drivel is the same basket of deplorables that hate the idea of government anything unless it's them getting a handout.

[Puremallace]

Your point being what? The only people who will actually believe that drivel is the same basket of deplorables that hate the idea of government anything unless it's them getting a handout.

Problem we are having in the US is convincing Republicans that insurance companies are milking them for every dime they have. We were actually starting to make progress but when shit like this happens it scares the hell out of people who fear any form of socialism in the US even though most of our current system is based on socialism.

[Elegiac]

Problem we are having in the US is convincing Republicans that insurance companies are milking them for every dime they have. We were actually starting to make progress but when shit like this happens it scares the hell out of people who fear any form of socialism in the US even though most of our current system is based on socialism.

Okay, so the doctors at GOSH should have just let the parents do whatever in order to increase the chances that stupid people in America might look more fondly on the NHS.

Are you aware how utterly inane you sound at the moment?

[Shadowmelded]

Just want to thank the UK for killing ANY CHANCE ever that US would get single payer thanks to this bullshit you guys just pulled.



The issue from an American perspective is the state effectively took custody of this kid from his parents and denied him care no matter how experimental.

Your anger seems misplaced. You should be angry at the idiots who buy into the propaganda rather than the state carrying out it's responsibilities to protect the vulnerable from unnecessary suffering.

[Noradin]

Just want to thank the UK for killing ANY CHANCE ever that US would get single payer thanks to this bullshit you guys just pulled.



The issue from an American perspective is the state effectively took custody of this kid from his parents and denied him care no matter how experimental.

That is because apparently the "American perspective" is disconnected from reality.

- - - Updated - - -

Problem we are having in the US is convincing Republicans that insurance companies are milking them for every dime they have. We were actually starting to make progress but when shit like this happens it scares the hell out of people who fear any form of socialism in the US even though most of our current system is based on socialism.

So because your politicans lie to you it's the fault of those they lie about?

[draykorinee]

Well here in America Nigel Farage the running joke in the UK is a Fox News contributor and he just convinced half this country that the UK killed that kid. Republicans over here are already pointing to this case as clear evidence that single payer means giving up your rights to the government.

So yeah this doctor might have been a fuck twad but this is just bad.

I absolutely get what you're saying, I know you're taking shit for it, but fundamentally this has given a rallying call for stupid Americans to attack single payer healthcare. I'm on another forum and the guys is there are so idiotic, they're using this to all club together to bash 'the state' for blocking the transfer.

[ati87]

Problem we are having in the US is convincing Republicans that insurance companies are milking them for every dime they have. We were actually starting to make progress but when shit like this happens it scares the hell out of people who fear any form of socialism in the US even though most of our current system is based on socialism.

if any so called progress you are making evaporates based on bullshit made up arguments then you didn't make any real progress to begin with.

[Deleted]

The kid can't hear, see or feel sensation of touch and is irreparably brain damaged.
If he is in there - I think that's even worse, trapped and locked in a body that's beyond repair.

Just let the poor fucker go.