Posted on 07/13/2017 11:31:01 AM PDT by ColdOne
I wouldn't go so far as to call him a vegetable, but the photographs of him do not show a vibrant, active child. I suspect he cannot move.
He is in God's hands. There is nothing anyone can do about that.
The treatment has been used in a similar case.
‘The dad of a kid with a similar disability as young Charlie Gard made an emotional and moving plea on behalf of the Gard family.
Peter Smith’s son, Maxwell, has benefitted from the nucleoside therapy which Charlie’s parents desperately want for their son.
As Smith spoke with ITV’s This Morning, he was moved to tears, and spoke about his son’s improvement after the experimental treatment.’
http://ussanews.com/News1/2017/07/10/father-of-disabled-child-makes-emotional-plea-for-charlie-gard/
I'd take my child without any of those idiot's permission. So would a lot of other right-thinking people. I don't need permission to do what's right and take what's mine and neither do the parents of this child.
The government legitimately owns no one. Defiance of unjust laws and tyranny is a moral right and duty.
Your understanding is mistaken. It’s not the government, it’s the judiciary and the justice system, between which and the government (executive) there is fundamental separation of powers.
Really? In any circumstance?
Most civilised societies have found means to intervene between a child and his parents if there is a reasonable suspicion that the actions or inactions of those parents, intentional or unintentional, may cause harm to that child. Most advanced societies have branches of the justice system dedicated to arriving at a resolution which is in the interests of the child. The issue in this sad case is not whether such systems should exist, but whether the just resolution, which truly protects the interests of the child, has been confirmed.
‘The dad of a kid with a similar disability as young Charlie Gard made an emotional and moving plea on behalf of the Gard family.
I have read about this, and seen several claims that as many as 18 kids have been treated.
These kids, however, have a different disease than little Charlie. They have thymidine kinase 2 (tk2) deficiency. Charlie has ribonucleotide reductase small subunit 2 b (RRM2B) mutation. He is the 16th child diagnosed with this disease, and no child afflicted has ever lived beyond a few months. Nor has any child with RRM2B mutation ever been treated.
I did some analysis the other night: Post 47.
‘From what I understand, they are proposing using a completely untested “treatment” on him. Giving chemicals without any real knowledge of how they will affect a human body could very well cause him pain.’
If the treatment has been used on other kids, how is it “completely untested”?
And you would have to remove all if the equipment the child is on....They would arrest you before you got the second IV out.
You can blow hard all you want....the reality ( which you refuse to even acknowledge) is that you will not be able to no matter what you want to do.
That’s true even here in the U.s. There are plenty of cases that have gone to court to battle this very idea that decisions can be made for a persons treatment.
I do not have any evidence of what this "treatment" might be, based on the news stories. The name given makes no sense from a scientific view. Furthermore, we have no idea where the parents were intending to take the child, or whom they found to "treat" him.
Several people have speculated about what the "treatment" might be, but there is no evidence that any of the speculations are true. There is also no evidence to link the doctors and hospitals that have spoken up in the news to this case. It seems they are people found by the journalists to say something related to the story.
With all of that said, the only potential treatments that actually do exist and are described in the medical literature are in very early stages, years from human testing. There is no FDA approved treatment and no treatment in clinical trials. The children who have been reported as receiving treatment for a mitochondrial disease in fact have a different disease than Charlie. There is no scientific reason to think their particular treatment would work for the disease that Charlie has.
It is important to keep a time line on these events as they happened.....and that it is the parents who requested the courts intervention. Dr’s in the US cannot override the decisions of the 4 courts in Britain, which again the parents asked to intercede, as they represent the child according to British laws in these cases. This is why the child has been offered citizenship in the US now.
Where the legal standing is currently:
In April...the current ‘medical evidence’ showed this treatment had zero% for improvement at that time and that it would not work.... The four courts made their determination based on the evidence at the time “of the treatment”......now the parents are saying there’s up to a 10% chance the treatment would work... so the judge is asking the parents to provide evidence of this change since the April court hearings were zero% chance of improvement and their decision was based on that overwhelming medical evidence.
None of the US Dr’s have examined this child. Nor had they at the time they offered their treatment. The parents have been consistent at finding anyone who could give them hope, false or otherwise. Which though understandable... but in ‘this’ case and considering Charlie’s over all catastrophic health status... at two months and progression of the disease today it’s very difficult to understand why anyone would go further in using and potentially abusing this childs body further than has already been.
There is a difference between life supporting ‘death’.....and life supporting ‘life’......this child has been in the throws of ‘late stage’ progression of his particular severe disease (dying) for many months. .....and those who have had this type die before 4 months old.
There’s barrier in the brain which they question greatly if this medication can penetrate......he is already convulsing sometimes for hours on end which creates more than a delima for the Dr’s to treat him.
IMO continuing on is abusive....but I do understand the parents holding on. They have done so regardless of his being ‘terminal’ from the beginning at 8 weeks old.... and actively sought the magic that might change the outcome.
I saw this with a family member who could not let her husband go.....he was unrecognizable when she finally accepted there was no hope. A dreadful thing to watch.
There’s barrier in the brain which they question greatly if this medication can penetrate......he is already convulsing sometimes for hours on end which creates more than a delima for the Dr’s to treat him.
IMO continuing on is abusive....but I do understand the parents holding on. They have done so regardless of his being ‘terminal’ from the beginning at 8 weeks old.... and actively sought the magic that might change the outcome.
I saw this with a family member who could not let her husband go.....he was unrecognizable when she finally accepted there was no hope. A dreadful thing to watch.
I’m sorry to disillusion you, but the Queen has no power to intervene in this or any other judicial matter. I’m confident, however, that she, like the rest of us, has this desperately sad case in her prayers.
The Queen has enormous moral power to sway thinking, as well as political power—don;t kid yourself.
The Queen is not powerless nor is she an anachronism.
The levers of power in England are arcane and mostly unseen.
For her to have the power to do good but do nothing, is a grievous sin against God.
>
Has anyone publicly asked the question: Does the child belong to his parents, or is the child the property of the State?
I’m sure the elites don’t want that question asked too loudly.
>
If answered, the English people can do nothing to rectify.
Even here, most people would be surprised at the answer. Yet, as long as DWTStars and MNFootball are on, most wouldn’t care either way.
IOW, it not *hurting* the masses enough for them to care.
The only opportunity open to the Queen to exercise those rights is in her weekly meeting with the Prime Minister. Since what is said in those meetings is always private, we cannot know whether or not this matter has been raised. Even if it has been, it cannot affect the High Court case, since the Prime Minister has no power to direct the judiciary.
You must have missed the testimony of the dr who said the treatment had a 10-56% chance of helping Charlie. This dr has agreed to fly from NY to London to evaluate Charlie firsthand.
You’ll be relieved to know that a US dr has agreed to fly to London to evaluate Charlie. It will be fascinating to learn the results of his examination.
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.