Posted on 07/31/2017 2:42:26 PM PDT by kathsua
Another family in the UK is fighting to keep doctors from forcing their sick baby off of life support. From The Mirror story:
Charlie Gard supporters are rallying round the family of a seriously ill little boy as his parents face a battle with medics to keep him alive.
Tiny Alfie Evans in being treated at Alder Hey Children’s Hospital in Liverpool and suffers from a mystery condition staff are struggling to diagnose.
The 14-month-old family are hoping to find pioneering treatment for their little boy abroad.
Alfie has been in a coma in the hospital’s intensive care ward since last December, and suffers regular seizures.
As in the Charlie Gard case, doctors have warned they may have to take legal action as Tom [Evans] will not let them switch off Alfie’s life support.
That’s a twist: Unlike in Charlie Gard’s case, there is no firm diagnosis. Why would doctors try to force a baby off of life support when they haven’t been able to determine the cause of his cognitive disability?
But realize, as in all “futile care” cases, the treatment is unwanted by doctors because it is working.
Hence, it isn’t the treatment but Alfie’s life that would be declared futile if the courts pulled another “Charlie Gard.” Half a dozen US hospitals may be willing to offer alternative care for the Alfie:
Tom and Alfie’s mum, Kate James, have not yet faced a court battle like and are hopeful it will not come to that after more than a dozen American hospitals said they might be able to help.
Tom said: “I’m pleading for help from anywhere now. I’ve been getting in touch with lots of hospitals, and I’ve had a particularly positive response from one in Miami, which has received Alfie’s details.”
Hopefully, the international brouhaha over Charlie will make it more difficult in Alfie’s case for the authorities to impose another “futile patient” die-sooner-than-later outcome.
P.S. Alfie’s parents have established an “Alfie’s Army” Facebook Page for those who may be interested.
Government health care.
Bureaucratic Death Committees determining who dies...
Or anyone in need of care
“Bureaucratic Death Committees determining who dies...”
THIS is why Charlie Gard had to die...
If he was allowed to escape the clutches of Socialist Medicine, even though the parents could AFFORD TO PAY FOR IT, what would happen to the next child in a similar situation, whose parents COULD NOT pay for it.
Charlie Gard had to die, for the good of the State Monopoly.
Imperfect children are sentenced to a lingering death in Nazi Britain.
The Courts are the ultimate death panel. And they took no oath to “Do no harm” even as the Doctors violate theirs.
a child on life support for 7 or 8 months is not sick. The child is essentially dead absent life support
Just watched videos of this baby stretching and reacting to his foot and hand being tickled (not certain of dates). Found this article from July 3, 2017...
“They told me he would never breathe unassisted again, but int he past few months he has been off his ventilator three times, once for four days, once for four hours, but once for 13 consecutive days.”
“In the deepest part of his coma, Alfie measures three on the Glasgow coma scale - the lowest possible score, meaning he isn’t responding to anything. But over the last few months, Alfie has varied drastically on the scale (15 being ‘not in a coma’) and has reached a score as high as 10.”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parents-desperate-diagnosis-baby-son-10729222
Sadly, I am told that doctors, at least in the U.S., no longer recite The Hippocratic Oath...leaving them free to do harm, I suppose.
From the article:
“..I’ve had a particularly positive response from one in Miami, which has received Alfie’s details.”’
Very hopeful, if only the courts don’t act as if they own the parents’ child again.
Prayers said.
Thank you for your post No. 9.
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.