The difference is, that in our current system, he could have the surgery paid for privately. That is against the law in the UK. Wouldn’t be “fair.” Wouldn’t use “resources appropriately.”
Some insurances would have done the surgery to get him home, for cheaper care. He would most likely have died from an infection by now. I don’t understand the reasoning behind refusing, unless it’s the legal problem of difference of opinion between the parents about what is best for the boy.
That's correct only if you mean that the state wouldn't pay for private care. Not correct if you mean that the parents couldn't choose to pay for private care themselves, if they have the means. They can. Nothing illegal about that - people do it here (in Britain) all the time - me included.
The difference of opinion probabably would preclude that route.
The mother has the primary responsibility and she is not willing to watch her baby suffer. Additionally, all the family were also against it.
Decisions as far reaching and life changing as that cannot and should not be made on emotion by adults.
As for not having private care in England that is just not true.