U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-05-2017, 07:21 AM
 
Location: Camberville
11,950 posts, read 16,668,051 times
Reputation: 19451

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by OnOurWayHome View Post
Would trump and the right be offering this if he were a Muslim baby in the middle east?
Agree it's an empty and meaningless tweet by trump as trumpcare will take away medicaid from poor families in his own country. What happened to America first?

Heartbreaking for the parents. I can't even imagine.
Of course not. There are kids dying of curable cancers, not to mention treatable illnesses and preventable injuries, in Syria and the refugee camps right now. We deny them from entering our country every day.

Not to mention the Americans who go into financial ruin paying for treatable illnesses thanks to our broken healthcare system. I'm one of them - and I got into treatment MUCH slower and with less effective treatment protocols (per my insurance, not what my doctors recommended) than my peers in cancer centers in the UK, Canada and Israel. If an insurance company can deny coverage for an internationally accepted chemotherapy protocol with a 90% 5 year cure rate for a late stage cancer, then what are the odds they would continue paying for tens of thousands of dollars a day in coverage for a terminally ill infant who will never get better?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-05-2017, 07:24 AM
 
Location: Gulf Coast Texas
28,135 posts, read 15,264,834 times
Reputation: 11193
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedZin View Post
The doctor from the facility has already said the treatment is very unlikely to help this little boy.

The parents probably need therapy in this case more than their child needs to continue suffering for a Trump PR stunt.
I think your post says more about you than it says about the parents. Pretty cold...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2017, 07:25 AM
 
10,829 posts, read 4,119,037 times
Reputation: 4699
Quote:
Originally Posted by charolastra00 View Post
Of course not. There are kids dying of curable cancers, not to mention treatable illnesses and preventable injuries, in Syria and the refugee camps right now. We deny them from entering our country every day.
We can't take care of everyone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2017, 07:30 AM
 
Location: Camberville
11,950 posts, read 16,668,051 times
Reputation: 19451
Quote:
Originally Posted by dechatelet View Post
We can't take care of everyone.
So we can take care of infants who will never breathe or eat on their own and will never get better versus children who could live a normal lifespan with treatment?

Seems legit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2017, 07:31 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
11,340 posts, read 3,850,105 times
Reputation: 7017
The initial case judgement and evidence is here, and it should be noted that -

Quote:

At one stage, Great Ormond Street Hospital got as far as deciding to apply for ethical permission to attempt nucleoside therapy here - a treatment that has never been used on patients with this form of MDDS - but, by the time that decision had been made, Charlie’s condition had greatly worsened and the view of all here was that his epilepticencephalopathy was such that his brain damage was severe and irreversible that treatment was potentially painful but incapable of achieving anything positive for him.

The doctor in the USA said as follows:“Seeing the documents this morning has been very helpful. I can understand the opinions that he is so severely affected by encephalopathy that any attempt at therapy would be futile. I agree that it is very unlikely that he will improve with that therapy. It is unlikely.”

Great Ormond Street Hospital -v- Yates and Gard

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2017, 07:32 AM
 
Location: Gulf Coast Texas
28,135 posts, read 15,264,834 times
Reputation: 11193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World View Post
The parents brought the legal action and went to the Courts, and the parents and their legal representitives were the ones arguing that the childs human rights were being breached in relation to Articles 2, 5, 6 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Courts examined the evidence and found that the childs human rights were not being breached, indeed four courts came to the same conclusion and the evidence was even reviewed by a Spanish medical team who came to the same conclusion as the doctors at Great Ormond Street Hospital.

The Courts have to try and settle numerous family disputes which is why countries have family courts, whilst human rights courts have to settle disputes in relation to potential breaches of human rights, as in this case.

Whilst the whole case is very very sad, it had to be decided one way or the other by the courts as it would have been in any other country.

The treatment would be detrimental to the child, and will not cure the child or imprive his poor quality of life, the child is going to die whether he is given the treatment or not (he's terminally ill) and the treatment would just lead to unnessary pain.

The decision is based on the mitochondrial mutation that is present in the child's cells (as this condition causes the break up of the DNA and mitochondrial mutation varies from case to case) and is also based on the childs cognitive condition relating to the fact he is irreversible brain damaged can not speak, hear, cry or make a noise, move, eat, swallow or even breathe unaided, however he is in pain, discomfort and suffering according to doctors and as Lord Winston a former paedatric and fertlity expert pointed out, undergoing further treatment could be more detrimental and will be even more tragic and even more disturbing for this child.
My understanding is that in the UK - if there is a disagreement between the hospital and patient, it goes to the court. That's may understanding of the law. The UK court sided with GOSH.

It is then that the parents took it to the higher European courts to appeal the first ruling.

Other than it is in the law in the UK, why should parents need anyone's OK to seek care for their child?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2017, 07:36 AM
 
Location: Houston, TX
14,471 posts, read 8,332,907 times
Reputation: 28989
Quote:
Originally Posted by dechatelet View Post
He's not proposing any cuts to Medicaid.

Medicaid will increase under his and the Republicans' plan, not decrease.


It should be slashed though.

It should only be for the very poor and the elderly in nursing homes.

That's what it was originally for, until the O'care "expansion".

To hear Democrats talk now, millions of people must have been dying for lack of care before that expansion.
Baloney. Just look at Trump's budget and you'll see. I understand how Medicaid works and what happens to people who don't have access to what is a very bare bones and lousy insurance plan. But it's better than nothing. And I actually work with Medicare patients. What have you done for them?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/22/u...cuts.html?_r=0

Last edited by Scooby Snacks; 07-05-2017 at 08:05 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2017, 07:36 AM
 
Location: Gulf Coast Texas
28,135 posts, read 15,264,834 times
Reputation: 11193
Quote:
Originally Posted by dechatelet View Post
We can't take care of everyone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charolastra00 View Post
So we can take care of infants who will never breathe or eat on their own and will never get better versus children who could live a normal lifespan with treatment?

Seems legit.
This is the problem.

Whose responsibility is it to take care of one's health? Is it personal/family responsibility, or societal responsibility ("we") ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2017, 07:40 AM
 
10,829 posts, read 4,119,037 times
Reputation: 4699
Quote:
Originally Posted by charolastra00 View Post
So we can take care of infants who will never breathe or eat on their own and will never get better versus children who could live a normal lifespan with treatment?

Seems legit.
We're not paying for any of this; we would be paying for it with Muslim refugees.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2017, 07:40 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
11,340 posts, read 3,850,105 times
Reputation: 7017
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
My understanding is that in the UK - if there is a disagreement between the hospital and patient, it goes to the court. That's may understanding of the law. The UK court sided with GOSH.

It is then that the parents took it to the higher European courts to appeal the first ruling.

Other than it is in the law in the UK, why should parents need anyone's OK to seek care for their child?
If their is a claim that human rights are being breached it goes to Court, in terms of hospital disagreements they are very rare. This was a human rights issue relating to the European Convention on Human Rights which is enshrined in to British Law and the same law applies to 47 European countries in all.

It also should be noted that the American Doctor offering the experimental treatment agreed with GOSH that the baby was unlikely to improve with the therapy, and that he is so severely affected by encephalopathy that any attempt at therapy would be futile. The US doctor also confirmed that he had never treated with nucleoside therapy anyone who had encephalopathy.

So in reality no credible experimental treatment is being offered, indeed the doctor offering the treatment in the US even agrees it would be futile in this case.

The child is dying and in pain, so there are no a lot of options, the only credible option is end of life palliative care including pain relief, which is what the hospital is currently doing.

Last edited by Brave New World; 07-05-2017 at 07:52 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top