 |
| This child has been sentenced to die by single-payer healthcare bureaucrats. Because fairness, comrades! |
Britain's National Health Service - aka the country's single-payer healthcare system - have pronounced all treatments prospectively futile and fruitless, so the NHS will not authorize any treatment. The infant's condition, absent the ventilator, is terminal.
So the parents decided to take the child to America for a therapy trial treatment. Needless to say, the bureaucrats running the NHS could not let their judgment be questioned, so they denied the request, dismissing the American treatment as merely "experimental."
(You and I will wonder why on earth a family need the government's permission to leave the country, no matter the child's medical condition, but remember, Britain is not a country of liberty but of statist domination.)
As the Daily Mail reported:
Chris Gard, 32, and Connie Yates, 31, wanted to take their 10-month-old son - who suffers from a rare genetic condition and has brain damage - to the US to undergo a therapy trial.
Doctors at Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London, where Charlie is being cared for, said they wanted him to be able to 'die with dignity'.
But the couple, from Bedfont, west London, raised almost £1.4million so they could take their son to America but a series of courts ruled in favour of the British doctors. ...So the parents got tied up in legalistic red tape and then were told, basically, that they had no standing to appeal to the European Commission on Human Rights.
It comes after specialists at Great Ormond Street said therapy in the US is experimental and will not help and added that life support should stop.
And after losing legal battles in the UK, Charlie's parents were hoping judges in Strasbourg, France, would come to their aid.
But on Tuesday afternoon, the ECHR rejected a last-ditch plea and their 'final' decision means the baby's life support machine will be switched off.
The ECHR announced the application to the court by the parents was 'inadmissible' and added that their decision was 'final'.
But wait! as they say on TV. There's more! Having lost every avenue of appeal, Chris and Connie asked simply that they be allowed to take Charlie home to die there. And the Daily Mail covered that, too:
Charlie Gard's bereft parents have blasted his 'heartless' doctors who have refused to let him come home to die, MailOnline can reveal today.
Connie Yates and Chris Gard have been told by Great Ormond Street their son's life support will be switched off later today but he cannot leave the ward.
The couple's 'final wish' for Charlie has been blocked and his mother Connie said yesterday in a video for MailOnline: 'We promised our little boy every single day that we would take him home'.
Mr Gard added: 'We want to give him a bath at home, put him in a cot which he has never slept in but we are now being denied that. We know what day our son is going to die but don't get a say in how that will happen.' ...
His father Chris, 32, said: 'Our parental rights have been stripped away. We can't even take our own son home to die. We've been denied that. Our final wish if it all went against us can we take our little boy home to die and we are not allowed.This is nothing but outright cruelty, which makes the NHS' comment all the more nauseating:
'They even said no to a hospice.'
A spokesperson for Great Ormond Street Hospital said: 'As with all of our patients, we are not able to and nor will we discuss these specific details of care. This is a very distressing situation for Charlie's parents and all the staff involved and our focus remains with them.'This is simply a baldfaced lie and nothing else. Compassion for the Gards does not exist in the NHS, which has treated them (well, not treated Charlie) with officious contempt and disregard for their interests or well being.
What is really going on? Stephen Green explains,
Robert Bidinotto posted on Facebook yesterday:
They have already declared him, explicitly or tacitly, “brain dead” or vegetative. If they are correct — and I have no reason to doubt their medical judgment — then no issue of protecting the child’s rights or “interests” exists any longer — by their own premises.What the parents are proposing is thus no threat to the child, his rights, or his interests. It is simply to exercise THEIR right to conduct an experiment of sheer desperation, in order to see whether they can salvage their child. If that child is already medically irretrievable, then please define for me whose “interest” would be threatened by allowing the parents to exercise that right.
There is no rational or moral reason to deny them this right. The only conceivable “interests” involved are those of the denizens of the socialized-medicine regime, who do perceive a threat — not to a child they have already written off, but to their power to make and enforce life-or-death decisions over the disposition of healthcare. No, sorry: This case is not about science; it is not about the child’s rights or interests; it is about exerting state power against a perceived popular menace to the socialized medicine system, which would come from allowing individuals the freedom to exercise their rights to make their own personal medical choices.
What is happening to the Gards is just “necessary” reminder of the individual’s place in the socialized scheme of things.Now, remember that, according to President Obama himself and Harry Reid. single-payer (nationalized) health (non)care was real objective of Obamacare all along. And remember too that "death panels" were just fevered imaginations of its critics.
Update: "The Vatican’s Statement On UK Baby Condemned To Die Is Frightening" -- If this is where the Vatican now makes its stand, then the most vulnerable members of society—which is to say all of us, at some point—are in trouble.
Posts
