Trump offers to help terminally ill Charlie Gard (examples, laws, Florida)
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.
Let me guess: liberal statists arguing the government has ruled to end his life and the parents have no say.
How'd I do?
Ta dah! A+
Libs don't like babies unless they can use them to get welfare.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooby Snacks
The parents can keep him alive on the machines if they can pay for it themselves. The British government is not willing to continue paying for medical care on an infant who is terminally ill and has zero hope of improvement.
Private donations will pay for the treatment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn
^^^This and the right-wing posters here believe our tax dollars should be used to keep baby Charlie from dying as long as possible.
The parents can keep him alive on the machines if they can pay for it themselves. The British government is not willing to continue paying for medical care on an infant who is terminally ill and has zero hope of improvement.
This is the plain issue for me. And if the government is the single payer of care, then this is basically a death sentence - because they aren't paying.
This is the plain issue for me. And if the government is the single payer of care, then this is basically a death sentence - because they aren't paying.
Are you of the belief that private care is banned in any single payer country? Do you honestly believe that?
Are you against single payer Medicare? You want the insurance corporation to make the decisions for you and deny both insurance and care?
This is the plain issue for me. And if the government is the single payer of care, then this is basically a death sentence - because they aren't paying.
The decision was made based on expert medical opinion and is supported by an independent judiciary, it has nothing to do with Government, the executive, legislative and juditiary being three seperate entities.
The case has nothing to do with money, indeed it was a case based around human rights, and indeed in such cases the rights of the child must be paramount as laid out in the Childrens Act 1989. The case was a legal one based on the law which states in such cases the welfare of the child must be paramount to any decision, and in this case given the fact the child had such a poor quality of life, was in pain and given that the experimental treatment would not save the childs life and had the potential to cause greater suffering, it was decided that the best option would be pallaitive care before switching off artificial life support in order to stop further suffering.
As for Great Ormond Street Hospital it is one of the wealthiest hospitals in Europe, and as well as receiving money from Government, it also receives massive charitable donations and has numerous wealthy benefactors. Indeed the hospital is currently undergoing massive building and redevelopment, and other investment. The hospital also takes NHS and private patients from across the world.
And here's a simple answer, the child is beyond help. The doctors at GOSH have said so, and other top experts in the illness that Charlie suffers from agree.
If you know more about his condition than his doctors, please let GOSH know.
A US father whose daughter died aged 15 after battling a similar condition to Charlie Gard has urged the boy's parent's not to give up on their 'glimmer of hope'
Chuck Mohan, from Florida, says his child Gina fought bravely against mitochondrial disease until she was a teenager before she passed away.
...
Mr Mohan says CHarlie must be released from GOSH and given his chance.
He said: 'In Charlie’s case there are 18 children around the world with a similar condition and all 18 are being treated and receiving positive results. You have the opportunity for a chance, a glimmer of hope for Charlie’s condition'.
...
Six-year-old Art Estopinan has virtually the same genetic condition and is fighting it with the pioneering drugs therapy that is being denied to Charlie.
His father, Art Senior, said: ‘We feel very fortunate to be American and not British – because if we lived in the UK, Arturito would surely be dead by now.
The child is terminally ill, and brain damaged. There is no hope or help for him. Trump's tweet on the matter is just hypocritical bs. He wants to help a British child who is beyond help, while working to deprive US citizens of their health insurance.
Good Answer!
I remember as a child my Granny used to say, people need to clean their own backyard before complaining about the neighbors yard. Mr Trump this applies to you also. People in USA will soon(some) lose INSURANCE coverage. BTW--U and the Senators (old men writing a ne new plan no females)will have your coverage.
The decision was made based on expert medical opinion and is supported by an independent judiciary.
The case has nothing to do with money, indeed it was a case based around human rights, and indeed in such cases the rights of the child must be paramount as laid out in the Childrens Act 1989.
As for Great Ormond Street Hospital it is one of the wealthiest hospitals in Europe, and as well as receiving money from Government, it also receives massive charitable donations and has numerous wealthy benefactors.
From the article I linked to earlier...
And the hospital, which won legal battles all the way to the Supreme Court and European Court of Human Rights to be allowed to remove his life-support, claimed its hands were tied by their rulings. They have all declared that Charlie is brain-damaged, suffering pain and has no hope of recovery, and that it is in his ‘best interests’ to die.
Senior legal sources said the various court rulings mean doctors are obliged to withdraw Charlie’s artificial ventilator and prevent him from going to America. They said even if the hospital changed its stance, it would take another court case to reverse the rulings which effectively demand that Charlie must die.
The hospital's hands are tied. The parents' hands are tied. The courts have spoken. Death. Sad.
The parents should be allowed to explore other options at their own free will - independent from any governing body, and care providers should be able to freely accept or reject Charlie's case.
Even though there are similar cases where progress is being made (described above)... the courts have mandated his death.
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.
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.
Good Answer!
