Posted on 07/06/2017 7:56:11 AM PDT by Heartlander
Were this baby being cared for in a British private hospital, rather than an NHS hospital, his doctors would have gone to court for exactly the same reasons and with the same outcome.
The determinaton to polticise this sad case is depressing.
I would hate to be the doctor or nurse that turns off Charlie’s life support.
It he or she’s identity is revealed, that murderer will live the rest of
their life in fear.
Providing nutrition and hydration are considered medical treatments, which if you don’t receive while depending on the care of others, you will die...that is, if a doctor is willing to write such orders to withhold. It took Terri almost two weeks to give up to that horrific ordered ‘treatment.’
There is no such thing as ‘free care’ unless the care is provided pro bono, which is what the offer is for Charlie. The parents can use the money they have raised to supplement the care. You are right - it won’t last long at $50k a day. Those aren’t costs, however, those are ‘charges’ - big difference. But, that’s another issue for another day.
sorry, $30k a day not $50k.
Providing nutrition and hydration is one thing, providing ICU care is a whole different ball of wax.
And why should Charlie get free care when American citizens who would go to the same hospital have to pay? Especially when a lot of these hospitals receive public taxpayer monies and credits.
Cost and charges are the same thing, someone American is going to pay for it.
Send him to the Vatican, they can pay for it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.