Posted on 07/14/2017 1:54:32 PM PDT by Nextrush
‘I do not trust GOSH doctors’
Period.
Politicians are nowhere near this, fortunately. As for the medical team and the judge, the full judgement from the first hearing makes it quite clear that all would be only too happy for Charlie to be referred elsewhere, if there was any evidence that would be to his benefit rather than to his harm. At that time the alternative seems only to have been put forward in vague terms, so I don’t know if any of the half dozen hospitals you mention was involved. But the arrival of Dr Hirano will, I hope, result in something more specific.
‘if there was any evidence that would be to his benefit rather than to his harm’
Remaining in the control-freak custody of GOSH was and is guaranteed death with zero chance of improvement. Being released for experimental treatment offered the chance of improvement.
You are mistaken in believing GOSH would have been happy to release Charlie. They preferred to guarantee his death over giving him a chance, and it’s no more complicated than that.
That understood, I have to say that your statement 'NHS's goal from the outset has been Charlie's death' is so inconceivably far removed from anything I've ever encountered or know of the NHS or the many people I've dealt with, at all levels of the NHS system, that I find it impossible to engage with a question founded on such a premiss.
The facts entirely support my statement. GOSH never had any treatment options to offer Charlie. Their only recommendation has been to remove his ventilator and let him die.
The experimental treatment has been available throughout. It offers no guarantee but it does offer a chance for a positive outcome. So the choice throughout has been to let Charlie die or give him a chance.
GOSH’S response speaks for itself.
I erred in my response. I said GOSH ‘recommended,’ removing Charlie’s ventilator. Nothing could be further from the truth. They set a date on which to remove it. They did this entirely against the parents’ wishes. They simply made a unilateral decision re the day on which Charlie would die.
It’s true the deadline passed. But the parents are still being jerked around, and Charlie is still under a death sentence.
People who want to give GOSH the benefit of the doubt need to answer the following question. How is it in Charlie’s best interest to pontificate that certain death is preferable to possible improvement? That is the elephant in the room that GOSH defenders simply refuse to acknowledge. The choice between inexorable death and a possibly beneficial treatment is stark. What did GOSH/the NHS have to lose by granting the parents this chance?
They could only possibly lose one thing: the right to officiate over Charlie’s death.
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.