Making the news today....

[Vespasian]

1 minute ago, WesD said:

True but when other doctors want to take a look and offer hope i.e. The yank and the pope you have a duty to explore those avenues. We are all different but knowing I had explored every option and the end result was the same I'm sure time would heal somewhat and my conscience would be clean. 

 

Again it's easy looking from the outside in, I couldn't imagine having to live through what those parents have gone through. 

I'm sure the hospital had the finest medical personal you can get your hands on, and I'm sure they understood the proper level of care required, and when it was time to let go.. 

 

You can't keep postponing the inevitable by inviting every doctor to give an opinion on the subject..  parents have to face up to the inevitable and face the truth of a situation instead of attempting to put off the moment of truth.. 

 

I'm sure the parents after some reflection will admit they have made a mistake by dragging out this tragic incident that has befallen them..

[Mesterh]

2 minutes ago, Vespasian said:

I'm sure the hospital had the finest medical personal you can get your hands on, and I'm sure they understood the proper level of care required, and when it was time to let go.. 

 

You can't keep postponing the inevitable by inviting every doctor to give an opinion on the subject..  parents have to face up to the inevitable and face the truth of a situation instead of attempting to put off the moment of truth.. 

 

I'm sure the parents after some reflection will admit they have made a mistake by dragging out this tragic incident that has befallen them..

And a lot of medical decisions are based on cost and not what is good for the patient. I imagine nearly every parent would hang on aslong as possible hoping for a miracle cure, you can't blame them for that. Don't worry, for every £million of money wasted on solicitors there will be 10 times wasted on old people cluttering up GP surgery's because they want a gab with the doctor about their bunions.

 

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

2 minutes ago, Mesterh said:

old people cluttering up GP surgery's because they want a gab with the doctor about their bunions.

 

Rather they were in the GP surgery than at the bank, the conversation is the same in both locations but it has much less impact upon me if they are in the surgery than it does when I'm waiting behind them at the bank....

[Vespasian]

Just now, Mesterh said:

And a lot of medical decisions are based on cost and not what is good for the patient. I imagine nearly every parent would hang on aslong as possible hoping for a miracle cure, you can't blame them for that. Don't worry, for every £million of money wasted on solicitors there will be 10 times wasted on old people cluttering up GP surgery's because they want a gab with the doctor about their bunions.

 

Well I doubt this case had anything to do with costs.. still if we're talking about costs so what, its still part of any equation is it not.. would you spend ten million on a keeping a drunk alive only to have him drink himself to death as soon as he's out the hospital?.. George Best anyone..

 

Would you be willing to give 70% of your and everone else earning to keep more people alive that might otherwise die?.  its all about balance, finding the right balance between what we are willing to give and what can be done with that money..

[matelot]

15 minutes ago, WesD said:

True but when other doctors want to take a look and offer hope i.e. The yank and the pope you have a duty to explore those avenues. We are all different but knowing I had explored every option and the end result was the same I'm sure time would heal somewhat and my conscience would be clean. 

 

Again it's easy looking from the outside in, I couldn't imagine having to live through what those parents have gone through. 

However the American doctor hadn't even examined baby Charlie...

 

According to GOSH every single expert doctor that had examined Charlie said that "nothing could be done for him"....

 

It just seems bizarre, IMHO, to go to the High Court on the back of the opinion of a doctor's opinion who hadn't even seen baby Charlie.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/25/michio-hirano-us-doctor-intervention-charlie-gard-case-raises-ethical-questions

 

 

 

[matelot]

20 minutes ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

Not being a girl or anything..... but, if ever there was a topic that could fairly be considered as not appropriate for 3rd party comment, I can't think of one that more appropriately deserves some reserved respect than this one...  Just my tuppence - whilst respecting the rights of free speech and the right to be offended by the right of free speech (and the right to be offended by someone suggesting the right to free speech might be offensive, if you get my drift...)  Christ, how can anyone seriously want to try and delve into the world of pain that someone else might be experiencing in such circumstances?  

Baby Charlie was made into a circus by his parents. You can't really blame people for discussing the case.

[WesD]

The American doctor had helped someone in a very similar situation with the same problems as Charlie and they had responded well to treatment. 

 

Vesp we are not talking any doctors we are talking the popes and a guy from America with experience and positive results in such acute cases. 

 

If if you would have been at one with not exploring those 2 stones that's your choice I'd have explored them out of hope and love. 

 

To to be fair with hindsight it made no difference to the end result but at least they tried. 

 

We we will definitely be of differing opinion on this one so this is my last post with regards to Charlie as I won't change your opinion nor you mine so let's stop making the same points in different ways as I for one have no issues with the actions his parents took nor do I have any issues with how you would have handled the situation if it was you in their shoes. 

 

Hindsight is is a wonderful tool we never have the use of in real time. 

[matelot]

7 minutes ago, WesD said:

The American doctor had helped someone in a very similar situation with the same problems as Charlie and they had responded well to treatment. 

 

Vesp we are not talking any doctors we are talking the popes and a guy from America with experience and positive results in such acute cases. 

 

Would you mind posting a link to the other patient that "responded well to treatment"? From what I understand the condition that Charlie has is pretty much incurable. However if you post evidence to the contrary I will be big enough to admit I'm wrong.

 

Could you also post any evidence you have of the Pope's success in curing this condition?

[Mortimer Firewood]

8 hours ago, matelot said:

From what I undertand there is no treatment that would have made baby Charlie "better". His eventual death was inevitable.

 

Of course maybe the doctors at one of the best children's hospitals made a mistake and this American doctor could have cured Charlie. However I understand that the American doctor hadn't examined Charlie or even read his case notes....

 

I bet Great Ormond Street Hospital spent a million quid on legal fees fighting this case. Maybe that money should have been spent on healthcare for sick children? I bet many GOSH doctors were tied up looking at Charlie's case. Maybe it would have been better for them to have spent  that time looking after other kids?

You ever been in a children's hospital if not go spend an hour on  a children's cancer ward. 

 

[Mortimer Firewood]

9 hours ago, skyhuck said:

You think?

 

I generally think those who feel the need to reach for insults come across as unable to offer a counter argument, which in turn can appear to strengthen the argument of those they insult.

 

Far better to ignore or give a sound counter view, IMO.

 

9 hours ago, felixthelogchopper said:

You think your way, I'll think mine.

 

5 hours ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

Not being a girl or anything..... but, if ever there was a topic that could fairly be considered as not appropriate for 3rd party comment, I can't think of one that more appropriately deserves some reserved respect than this one...  Just my tuppence - whilst respecting the rights of free speech and the right to be offended by the right of free speech (and the right to be offended by someone suggesting the right to free speech might be offensive, if you get my drift...)  Christ, how can anyone seriously want to try and delve into the world of pain that someone else might be experiencing in such circumstances?