Replies

“Kinda like a murderer showing up at the victim’s funeral to express condolences.”

Good analogy, But in a way it’s even worse than that. First they kidnapped the child, then they murdered him and then they heaped insult on the family by shedding crocodile tears.

What’s most galling is the state taking over ownership of the child. They became legal kidnappers and used all the state power to keep the parents from taking their child back and have him treated by others. Truly Orwellian.

If some entity doesn’t want to spend their money to treat someone, I can understand, but making it illegal for someone else to voluntarily spend his money for the treatment, as was the case in this instance, is unbelievably cruel and insane.

I'm thankful the Mirror (as well as the Daily Mail) were there to produce and transmit the pictures which have touched sympathetic hearts and, indeed, aroused passions around the world.

But even they do not do the necessary investigative work to a move beyond the (necessary) sympathy and passion, and ask the vital questions:

How long was Alfie denied nutrition and fluids? Because once they do that, every cell of his body would be suffering from starvation and dehydration. That in itself would make "he's dying" a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Did they give him fentanyl or morphine or maybe a "Brompton cocktail" to put him into deep sedation? That would suppress those troublesome respiration reflexes and guarantee death by suffocation even before dehydration took him.
On what grounds could all those courts, including the European Court of Human Rights, deny his parents their right to choose the best options they could, to either prolong his life,or make what little life that remained more comfortable? (Keep in mind that transporting Alfie to Rome and admitting him Gesu Bambino was all paid for, and wouldn't have cost the NHS tuppence).
When his death was inevitable and expected in days--- but he was still breathing onhis own and not on the ventilator --- why couldn't his parents take him home for home hospice care?
If his death wasn't imminent, or there was the least possibility for even small improvement, why couldn't his parents get him discharged from Alder Hey so they could have him transported and explore better options?
Can the UK government actually legally put a travel ban on an Italian citizen --- a sick baby --- to prevent him getting medical treatment abroad? (What do they think he is, a terrorist??) Isn't revoking his right to travel, his right to leave the country, a violation of international law?
How can "child's best interest" (AS SEEN BY A JUDGE) overrule "parents' decision" (as seen by his mother and father) when the judge and the hospital select death as his "best interest"?
Why would the parents lose medical proxy or custody rights, when they are neither criminal, negligent, or abusive, and they are seeking different treatment with medical counsel (Polish, German, and Italian doctors all thought it reasonable to transport Alfie.)
Who barred the parents' spiritual counselor --- the supportive Italian priest --- from the hospital? And WHY? Yes, it was the Archbishop of Liverpool who did that, but did Alder Hey or its attorneys or representatives tell him to?
The article mentioned "Barrister Sophia Roper,who represented the little boy and took instructions from a court-appointed guardian," How the hell does that work? "His" lawyer is working for the count-appointed guardian who blocked his parents, vetoed his treatment, and forbade any other options? Isn't that, to say the least, conflict of interest?
How can death be directly intended as a "best interest", for a sick baby or anyone else? Is Alfie healthier dead?

Is this related to the notorious Liverpool Care Pathway which killed so many patients a decade or two ago? Are the people responsible for this mass-euthanasia project still working for the NHS or Alder Hey as administrators or (probably!) medical ethicists?
Is Alder Hey still stockpiling baby parts? Are the people responsible for this baby-organ-harvesting scheme still working for the NHS or Alder Hey as administrators or (again!) medical ethicists?
Is somebody going to make sure there's an independent autopsy before they bury the evidence?

Somebody answer these questions.