Posted on 07/01/2017 5:27:30 PM PDT by marshmallow
Socialism kills. Even when it doesn't need to. Because it wants to.
I complained in 2015 that villains were leaking out of C.S. Lewis’ fiction and getting jobs at the Vatican. The latest escapee is mealy-mouthed John Wither, the death-dealing bureaucrat with a heart of styrofoam from That Hideous Strength. Now a real-life clone of Wither is leading the Vatican’s once-prophetic Pontifical Council for Life.
You might remember Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, that Council’s new president, for his taste in religious art. As Catholic art historian Maureen Mullarkey documented, Paglia is best known for hiring a gay activist artist to decorate his cathedral with homo-erotic nudes.
But Paglia just distinguished himself in moral theology. He’s signing on to the death sentence that British and European courts have issued for little Charlie Gard. As Daniel Payne of The Federalist sums up this tragic case (in a pointed and lucid moral analysis worth reading slowly and carefully):
The baby, Charlie Gard, has been terminally ill since his birth, unable to move his limbs or breathe on his own.
His parents wish to bring him to the United States for a long-shot experimental treatment. The courts object, believing Charlie should be allowed to die “with dignity.” The European Court of Human Rights declined to hear an appeal, effectively sealing the boy’s fate.
Against the backdrop of this barbaric abuse of judicial authority, the Catholic Church—the world’s greatest defender of the right to life, and long a moral bulwark against state intrusion into the rights of the family sphere—has decided that the courts in this case are basically right.
…
The Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Life yesterday released a statement that waffles between limp-wristed equivocations and outright willful ignorance of church teaching.
(Excerpt) Read more at stream.org ...
“The baby, Charlie Gard, has been terminally ill since his birth, unable to move his limbs or breathe on his own.”
Or...
“While he was born healthy, at eight weeks his mother noticed he was floppier than friend’s babies.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4650642/Doctors-refuse-let-Charlie-Gard-s-parents-home.html
I haven’t followed this story. How did Charlie end up in the court system to begin with?
Charlie is a 10-month old patient in intensive care at Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH) in London.
On August 4, 2016, he was born a “perfectly healthy” baby at full term and at a “healthy weight”. After about a month, however, Charlie’s parents noticed that he was less able to lift his head and support himself than other babies of a similar age.
Doctors discovered he had a rare inherited disease - infantile onset encephalomyopathy mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome (MDDS).
The condition causes progressive muscle weakness and brain damage.
In October, after he had became lethargic and his breathing shallow, he was transferred to the Great Ormond Street Hospital.
Charlie’s parents wanted to take him to see specialists in the USA, who had offered an experimental therapy called nucleoside.
A crowdfunding page was set up in January to help finance the therapy.
Doctors at GOSH concluded that the experimental treatment, which is not designed to be curative, would not improve Charlie’s quality of life.
When parents do not agree about a child’s future treatment, it is standard legal process to ask the courts to make a decision. This is what happened in Charlie’s case.
Too bad they don’t have control over THEIR OWN CHILD, and could bring him home to die at home; or take him to the USA for even a long-shot chance at treatment.
No, the STATE has ownership of the child.
The British government learned well from East Germany on how to keep someone in the country at all costs, even death. The family of this child has the money to bring him stateside and the government refuses to let them leave. Britannia is gone, in her place is a cesspool of bureaucrats who bend over backwards for invasive species and tells natives to suck it up and die.
The baby, Charlie Gard, has been terminally ill since his birth
= = =
We have all been ‘terminal’ since our birth.
Leadership is needed on this issue and my appeal is not in the direction of the Vatican, but in the direction of the White House where real decisive leadership capable of embracing the issue and delivering results is available.
“but in the direction of the White House where real decisive leadership capable of embracing the issue and delivering results is available.”
—
Nonsense,this is NOT a USA problem.
.
That would mean a hospital in the USA would have to be willing to accept a patient who would be a placement problem when the treatment did not work. . No hospital wants to tie up an ICU bed for a patient with no curable problem with the resultant legal headaches.Especially when the American physicians have said that the treatment would not work. Eventually, the money would run out ( his care would be extremely expensive) and the US taxpayer would be on the hook for the rest.
Thanks. I guess even Donald J Trump couldn’t save him now. Once the system smells blood they won’t let go.
A hospital in the US has offered to treat him, but I see IUD rather put a price tag on someone’s life. I’ve seen your pro-death comments around here before. Sickening.
*you’d* not IUD
This baby is requiring the use of a ventilator due to a terminal condition. Even the Vatican has defined care like this extraordinary,. There is only so many ICU beds, only so many nurses and respiratory therapists available to take care of a terminally ill ventilator baby. Those resources should be going to patients , such as NICU babies , who need support for a few months while their lungs develop. Patients with pulmonary issues who need support should also be helped. We don’t put terminally ill cancer patients on vents because it is futile care. If you want to keep every terminally ill patient alive on vents, then be willing to fork over a huge amount in taxes. Go back to school and get your nursing or respiratory therapy degree, because the healthcare system will need a huge increase in providers to take care of patients like these. The system cannot handle it, financially and workforce labor.
No one can help and Charlie Gard’s parents have also been denied their final wish to be able to take their son home to die.
It is in the sense that the parents have the opportunity to come to the USA for experimental treatment for their child.
It has been offered and the parents have raised more than a million dollars to enable that to happen.
But the UK’s National Health Service will not allow the parents to take the child out of their hospital and to the USA for the experimental treatment.
Yes, the US government and its chief executive can and should get involved in getting the child to the USA and away from the socialist medical bureaucracy that rations health care and denies treatment to seriously ill people.
Were you reincarnated from Germany in 1940?
They got rid of people that cost them too much in wartime who were sick physically and mentally.
You would fit in quite well with their mentality.
I’m kinda confused. It’s says the experimental treatment isn’t a curative. Does that mean the treatment would only extend his life? How long would it extend his life?
I can see if the treatment would only extend his life by a few years, but he would still need to be in an ICU, that they would deny the treatment. I think any US insurance company would make the same call.
That sounds rather ghoulish of them to deny that request.
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.