Alfie Evans Survives being taken off child support, parents continue legal battl - Sensationalist Headlines

I'm fine with the government overriding parents when they're making clearly unsafe or unhealthy decisions for their children. For example, say a parent didn't want to allow their child to have an easily removable cancerous tumor taken out surgically. I would be all for forcing them to have the child operated on against the parent's will. It would be in the best interest of the child. But that is completely different than this. This is an example of the government telling parents that they must let their child die, and are not allowed to seek further treatment. Who gave the authority to the government to decide when it's time to stop trying, whether we agree or not? They shouldn't have the right to decide when a person ought to die. Also, note that the child has survived off of life support, which goes against the claim of the specialists, for a long enough time to have moved him to Italian care. So you can't argue that he needed all the machinery to keep him alive during transportation.

Thanks for not reading the story. Most of your points are invalid because you clearly haven't read into the story. Or you have and have either missed or misread many of the details. The condition cannot be cured, it cannot be treated, it hasn't even been diagnosed and all the Italians are offering is to hook him up to life support presumably forever, wow what a life that'll be. And I don't consider "barely able to breathe and still needs to be kept on oxygen" as surviving off life support. You're also forgetting the other machines keeping him alive other than the ventilator seeing as multiple organs have failed by this point. Its great that everyone can sit around and say they don't see what's wrong with keeping a braindead child on life support forever. I can only hope the Vatican is willing to accept every braindead patient to keep those nasty evil doctors from letting them die.

Honestly, this isn't a question of what's right and wrong to me. It's a question of whether the government should have the authority to force a person to die because they've decided it's best for them.

I understand the benefits of a national healthcare system but I think the parents should be able to take their kid out of the hospital if they want to. The kids gonna die eventually, why does the NHS care that it happens in their hospital? If the parents want to take him somewhere else that should be within their rights. If the parents wanted to take him home so he could die in peace at home would they let them? Being this forceful doesn't really sit well with me.

So, does the NHS just automatically refuse to treat people who suffer brain death, or do they offer life support for as long as the power of attorney wants?

he just needs that one drug thats sitting on a shelf somewhere that'll get him up and running in no time at all! this is why doctors are extremely hesitant about those right-to-try laws libertarians are pushing

Doctors hate this one trick!

No, it doesn't just refuse to treat people suffering brain death. It's just a pointless, collosal waste of resources to keep a body (and it is just a body at this point) alive. On the face of it, that seems cold, but at the end of the day there isn't any life left there, you're just prolonging the inevitable.

I really wonder how long they intend to kick the can down the road. Like I said in the other thread, are they really gonna be hobbling in to visit Alfie's malformed, poorly-grown effigy when they've reached their seventies and are on oxygen themselves?

The main issue is that the parents are going to cause unnecessary pain and suffering (that is, if he can feel at all) and move him to a hospital in Italy, which offers nothing that the current hospital doesn't already provide, over some false hope and pretence. I feel for the parents, but it's also very difficult to listen to reason in a situation like this. Ultimately doctors have the patients best interest in heart, which at this point is reducing suffering. While the parents are hopelessly trying to reduce their own suffering by attempting to save something which is already lost. Doctors have presented what they think is the best course of action in court and the judge has agreed. It was the parents that took this whole situation to the courts in the first place.

I know you're shitposting here but these are some thoughts about this some people are legitimately having; They simply don't see the correlation between brain & person. They see a body and simply think there is a person in there, because why wouldn't there be!

Whats the point? Was the kids condition going to improve? What chance of living a quality life did he live? Maybe they could stop his degeneration but wouldn't he still be in a semi-vegitative state most of his life

I mean if those people can survive without a brain, maybe alfie can too!

its not shitposting, these parents legitimately believe that there is a cure out there and the healthcare system isn't letting them find it. that's why they wanted to take him to the states, that's why they want to take him to italy, that's why they have refused to listen to doctors all around them. ya they're in denial and they definitely don't seem to grasp the fact that their son has no brain left, but the fact is they also seem to be willfully ignoring everything around them and think modern medicine can do everything. I've watched 2 grandparents wither away to vegitables now, its fucking horrible, there was nothing medicine could do to stop it, at some point you just have to say good bye and wait for it to end.

Furthermore, I wonder what they (and the people protesting on their behalf) will pin the blame on when the eventuality does set in. None of them can possibly say they weren't informed about the severity of his condition.

if they wanna chuck the little meat sack over the border to a new refrigerator who cares

Wow the state and the nhs are really determined this baby stays and dies on I wish they were this determined in trying to make society better

Doing a quick searcharoonie I understand why some people hold on to that dear hope, there's a lot of cases where people are misdiagnosed, read: heavy emphasis on misdiagnosed because a lot of people declared braindead are sometimes in comas. It's never a case of "miraculous recovery" as these whack ass mfs think, but again - misdiagnosis. http://kgov.com/brain-dead-patients-who-have-recovered ^ Literally the first result on google, hence why somebody with a child in a vegetative state might not want to instantly pull the plug. Any hope of regaining your child is one you're going to cling on to for dear life. From an outsiders perspective like ours, which is a demographic of 18-25 males with zero intention of having kids ever (at this point in life) it's easy to just say "Kill the poor bastard" but when you're in their situation things differ.

Those people have sympathy for the child, as they are in a similar state just not as far progressed as him. In a few years, they too will be vegetables.

the kid is a living corpse, keeping him alive is nothing but cruelty, to the kid and to the parents. that's why they decided to unhook the life support. any doctor who says they can fix this is selling snake oil.

The Liverpool echo facebook comments are cancer

Suffocating to death slowly is also cruelty. Frankly I think the NHS is in the wrong to refuse to allow him to be transported. If they say there is nothing they can do (and are basically footing a bill to keep him alive because they don't know what's wrong with him) why not transfer him? At the very least it gives them time to make preparations and come to terms with losing their child. You have to remember he started off completely fine, they bonded with him and he developed no symptoms until six months in and as someone who lived with a mother and her newborn child that bond is strong and not easily broken. Honestly the most kind thing they could do is put him to sleep.

it's a child that's why. you must understand the hospital is protecting the child at this point, it simply isn't feasible to arrange a transfer when it's against the interest of the patient. regardless if italy is arranging it, the hospital would be accountable in trusting them to transfer the patient.

Aapparently Alfie has passed away, just read, atleast the boy isn't in anymore pain or suffering

https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/990109137882304512 Yeah, it looks like Alfie passed away.

At least the poor kid is done suffering now. This whole situation has been tragic.

Man, I wonder why I even bothered looking at twitter about this. Such amazing tweets as: https://twitter.com/jemk79/status/990116118495924224

The thread title was a bit of a misconception. He didn't "survive" being taken off life support, he just lived for a few days after it was withdrawn, and as I understand it that's exactly what the doctors expected

I thought the doctors expected a few hours? But does that matter now

https://twitter.com/xtophercook/status/990184498125041664?s=19 https://twitter.com/xtophercook/status/990184880205189120?s=19 https://twitter.com/xtophercook/status/990185178713739265?s=19 https://twitter.com/xtophercook/status/990185524148174848?s=19 This is the best explanation I've seen of why our law works this way