Posted on 05/01/2018 5:55:32 PM PDT by ebb tide
British Prime Minister Theresa May has finally weighed in on the Alfie Evans case, offering condolences to the family but ultimately siding with Alder Hey Childrens Hospital.
During a visit to Brooklands Primary School in Sale, Greater Manchester on Monday, May received a question as to whether she would support Alfies Law, legislation proposed by British Member of European Parliament Steven Woolfe to restore parental rights over medical decisions in similar cases.
Alfie died Saturday at Alder Hey, which had removed his ventilator five days earlier in defiance of his parents wishes. Alfies doctors said he had an undiagnosed and untreatable neurological condition that caused serious and irreparable brain damage.
For months, parents Tom Evans and Kate James fought the hospital in court to keep him alive and transfer him to a willing hospital in Italy, but were denied at every turn. The 23-month-old boys second birthday would have been May 9.
The MEP Steven Wolff is campaigning for Alfies Law, which would give parents the final say over their childs life. Is that something you would potentially support or get behind? a reporter from Global Radio asked. The prime minister didnt answer, but spoke more generally about the case.
Its a tragic case, all of us feel enormously for the parents of Alfie, May said. This is a great tragedy to have to go through, the death of a child and particularly to see this happen in this way.
At the same time, however, she maintained it was important that decisions about medical support that are given to children and to others are made by clinicians who are expert in that matter.
Last summer, May refused to intervene in the similar case of Charlie Gard, another sick UK infant who died at the age of eleven months after authorities denied his parents the opportunity to seek treatment outside the country.
[N]o doctor ever wants to be placed in the terrible position where they have to make such heartbreaking decisions," May claimed at the time. I'm confident that Great Ormond Street Hospital have and always will consider any offers or new information that has come forward with consideration of the well-being of a desperately ill child."
Last week, Tom Evans told the Daily Star that May could be doing so much more to save my Alfie, but lamented that she was not interested in one of the biggest priorities that could potentially cause uproar for this country in the future.
Thats the way we treat children with disabilities in this country, Evans said. Weve tried everything to reach out to the government. Through MEPs, everything.
Woolfe, who has repeatedly advocated for Alfie throughout the ordeal, penned an op-ed on Saturday in The Independent making the case for Alfies Law.
He explained that it would give parents an impartial advocate to represent their interests from the beginning of any decision-making process, provide financial aid if legal appeals become necessary, and guarantees parents the right to a second opinion from a medical professional of their choice, who is independent from the British National Health Service and whose assessment must carry equal weight in court.
We cannot go on treating parents as bystanders, little more than unrelated and largely unwanted visitors when it comes to the decisions made by doctors and the courts, Woolfe wrote. The government has the power to act, and it must do so.
Disgusting. She is a Tory? Maggie must be rolling over in her grave.
Is UKIP dead in Britain now?
This why we broke away from the Brits. Tyranny!
Britain has a uniparty, too. And lacks a written constitution that protects the citizenry from its government.
The Christian legal group that helped the family is now under review by the government. This, according to The Guardian. The “conservative” Daily Telegraph is barely covering this story.
She’s a statist. Believes that the government should have all power over its subjects.
In the middle ages they called these types of experts “executioners”. They were considered experts at what they did too.
The terrible fallacy of appointed “experts” and worse than that is the many actions in many western societies that people have been convinced they must concede to such “experts”. It is the fallacy that the progressive regulatory state has been built on.
By what rational basis does any sane person believe that by mere appointment as “expert” the person automatically obtains the highest, best, only superior opinion on something?
Why is it ever defended, because they are defending the “experts”? No. It is defended because they are defending the state and state power to control events.
If it were a private hospital Alfie’s family could have said “we are taking our son elsewhere”. But once their son was the medical-property of the state, that could only be done with the state’s consent, and to do that the state would have to admit there are good opinions other than it’s own.
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.