Little Baby Charlie

[Arthur Brain]

Where there's life, there's hope.

You would have an innocent little baby murdered just because his condition isn't treatable.

You're just like the Nazis, killing those germans in their own hospitals who were sick or diseased or even slightly infirm, because they were, according to them, a drain on society.

The parents want to care for the baby until he dies, which will be a tragedy, of course, but it's never wrong to die.

The UK government and the medical doctors who are supposed to take care of their patients are wanting to murder this innocent little baby because of their bloodlust. It's never wrong to die. But it is always wrong to wrongfully kill someone. It is always wrong to murder.

If you think this has anything to do with "bloodlust" or your ironic comparison with the Nazis then you are flat out nuts. I suggest you acquaint yourself with the case and why the current rulings are in place before you go off on rants.

Oh, and the comparison with the Nazis is ironic on your part because, like them, you would have homosexuals killed. Sanctity of life with some of you zealots only stretches so far doesn't it?

 

[ok doser]

Sanctity of life ...

Applies to innocents, like helpless little babies

 

[ok doser]

Well maybe he could jump on this case that we're talking about here.

Oh, He's on it, never fear

 

[Arthur Brain]

Applies to innocents, like helpless little babies

Eh, since when did you think anybody was an "innocent"?

 

[rexlunae]

All this fuss over a dead baby....

It's very sad, and the parents deserve all the sympathy in the world. But their baby is dead, and but for a ventilator forcing air into his lungs, everything would shut down. It's not a shame that the British legal and health system don't pretend otherwise.

 

[JudgeRightly]

All this fuss over a dead baby....

It's very sad, and the parents deserve all the sympathy in the world. But their baby is dead, and but for a ventilator forcing air into his lungs, everything would shut down. It's not a shame that the British legal and health system don't pretend otherwise.

Last I checked, little Charlie Gard is not dead yet. If he was, then the New York hospital would not have offered to care for him. You don't give medical care to someone who is dead, do you?

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-york-hospital-agrees-to-admit-charlie-gard/

Why do you think he's dead?

 

[rexlunae]

Last I checked, little Charlie Gard is not dead yet. If he was, then the New York hospital would not have offered to care for him. You don't give medical care to someone who is dead, do you?

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-york-hospital-agrees-to-admit-charlie-gard/

Why do you think he's dead?

The judge's decision was based upon the fact that he suffers irreversible brain damage, which leaves him in a state that is unacceptable to his parents and to the carers. Even the doctor in the US doesn't claim that he can address either of those problems. He thinks he might be able to improve the metabolic condition which caused it, but even his parents admit that that state would be unacceptable. He may not be completely brain dead, but there's no path back to even a diminished life for him, even hypothetically.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/charlie-gard-ruling-read-full-10202972

 

[JudgeRightly]

The judge's decision was based upon the fact that he suffers irreversible brain damage, which leaves him in a state that is unacceptable to his parents and to the carers. Even the doctor in the US doesn't claim that he can address either of those problems. He thinks he might be able to improve the metabolic condition which caused it, but even his parents admit that that state would be unacceptable. He may not be completely brain dead, but there's no path back to even a diminished life for him, even hypothetically.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/charlie-gard-ruling-read-full-10202972

I didn't ask about the judge's decision (which, by the way, inherently claims that Charlie is still alive). I asked you, why do you think the little boy is dead? If he's still alive, then why did you claim that he's dead?

 

[kmoney]

All this fuss over a dead baby....

It's very sad,

Yeah you seem real broken up about it. lain:

 

[kmoney]

One thing I heard today is that the treatment that the US doctors want to try was for a case that had a different underlying cause so Charlie may not react the same way.

 

[JudgeRightly]

One thing I heard today is that the treatment that the US doctors want to try was for a case that had a different underlying cause so Charlie may not react the same way.

It's all moot if they can't get baby Charlie out of the UK hospital that wants to murder him.

 

[rexlunae]

Yeah you seem real broken up about it. lain:

It's sad in the sense of any disconnected event. I don't personally have a stake in the case, nor do I believe anyone here does, but that doesn't mean that I don't recognize how sad it is for the family.

Nonetheless, the baby is dead.

 

[rexlunae]

I didn't ask about the judge's decision (which, by the way, inherently claims that Charlie is still alive). I asked you, why do you think the little boy is dead? If he's still alive, then why did you claim that he's dead?

Because he has sustained brain damage that precludes him returning to even an acceptable artificially-supported state.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Because he has sustained brain damage that precludes him returning to even an acceptable artificially-supported state.

So you think just because he's "brain dead" that he's dead?

Here's a list of "brain dead" people who have recovered:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ife-support-machine.html?ICO=most_read_module

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/05/13/hand-of-god-heals-iowa-girl/27274399/

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...-father-and-9mm-handgun-resulted-in-a-miracle

https://www.yahoo.com/news/dead-mississippi-man-kicked-body-bag-died-171150335.html

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/n...-dead-woke-up-moments-before-organs-harvested

And there are more at kgov.com/brain-dead

So no, BRAIN DEAD DOES NOT MEAN DEAD.

Charlie Gard is still alive, and you want him to be murdered. Shame on you.

 

[fool]

All this fuss over a dead baby....

Do you have children Rex?

It's very sad

Glad we can agree that dead babies are sad.

, and the parents deserve all the sympathy in the world.

How about a little support?

But their baby is dead,

If he were we wouldn't be having this conversation.

and but for a ventilator forcing air into his lungs, everything would shut down.

That could be said of a lot of people.

It's not a shame that the British legal and health system don't pretend otherwise.

Until it's you.
Someone wants to try to do something. They have the money. If the NHS has given up then how can they stand in the way when all they have to do is get out of it?
This does not sit well in the U.S.

 

[rexlunae]

Do you have children Rex?


Glad we can agree that dead babies are sad.

How about a little support?

If he were we wouldn't be having this conversation.

That could be said of a lot of people.

Until it's you.
Someone wants to try to do something. They have the money. If the NHS has given up then how can they stand in the way when all they have to do is get out of it?
This does not sit well in the U.S.

The NHS hasn't given up on him. The hospital workers caring for him have concluded, and crucially, the parents have agreed, that there is no plausible chance of him returning to an acceptable state. They have also concluded that while this treatment has very little chance of fixing the underlying condition, it also has no chance of improving his condition, and it could be very painful. It is, at best, an experiment that offers a nontrivial chance at suffering for the baby with no chance of restoring his health meaningfully.

As for the "until it's you" line, I have witnessed death delayed painfully beyond reason. There are two sides to that coin, and while I do not have children, I do understand that parents faced with the immediate prospect of losing a child may not be in a position to make a clear and rational decision that's actually in the interests of that child.

 

[fool]

and it could be very painful.

How can it be painful if he's a vegetable?

 

[ok doser]

How can it be painful if he's a vegetable?

Rex believes he's already dead

How can it be painful if he's already dead?

 

[glassjester]

How can it be painful if he's a vegetable?

How can it be painful if he's already dead?

Now why'd you have to go and bring logic into this?

 

[fool]

It should never be the case that a society aligns against parents that want to fight for their child.
If the NHS in the UK has run out of ideas then how could they possibly keep him there and kill him when there's a hospital in New York that will take him?