Very soon, Charlie Gard will die.
Jul 6, 2017 18:58:57 #
no propaganda please
Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun
WND
EXCLUSIVE
'Common sense' gone in denial of medical care to baby
All Charlie Gard's parents seek is permission to leave U.K. with sick son
Published: 2 hours ago
author-image
Joe Wilson About | Email | Archive
Joe Wilson is an intern with WND. He hails from Sunman, Indiana, and is finishing his bachelor's degree in History and Classical Language at Christendom College in Front Royal, Virginia. He is a devout Catholic and a baseball enthusiast, as well as an amateur filmmaker.
WASHINGTON – Very soon, Charlie Gard will die.
Barring intervention from senior officials in the British government, 11-month-old Charlie Gard, who suffers from a rare genetic disease, will have his life support withdrawn soon by officials at Great Ormond Street Hospital, where Charlie now is hospitalized, although they have not yet named a time.
Charlie’s fight for life has drawn massive sympathy from around the world, with statements of support from figures as influential as Pope Francis and President Donald Trump. But so far, the British National Health Service has given no indication that its bureaucrats will allow Charlie to live.
“We’re not allowed to choose if our son lives and we’re not allowed to choose when or where Charlie dies,” Charlie’s parents Connie Yates and Chris Gard said in a recent Facebook post. At the time, they thought Charlie’s life support would be withdrawn on June 30, but the hospital gave them an indefinite reprieve to say goodbye.
Charlie’s parents have raised close to $1.7 million to take Charlie outside of Britain for treatment.
And an American hospital has offered to treat Charlie for free.
The Papal Bambino Gesu hospital in Rome also offered to treat Charlie. However, the NHS, Britain’s single-payer healthcare system, will not let him go elsewhere receive care, even though it won’t cost a dime.
Charlie’s parents have argued for their parental rights to make the decision that is in the best interest of their son in front of many different courts, all the way up to the European Court of Human Rights. But they lost every step of the way, proving that in Europe, the state considers itself better equipped to make intensely personal decisions about the well-being of a child than his parents are.
Great Ormond Street Hospital has said Charlie should be allowed to “die with dignity,” and that its officials do not believe there is any substantial chance treatment will be able to save Charlie, who is one of only 16 people ever diagnosed with this rare mitochondrial depletion syndrome.
However, another boy diagnosed with a very similar disease in America has defied all expectations and is now six years old – after being told he had only two months to live upon being diagnosed as an infant.
An Italian child also has a similar story about beating a similar illness through treatment.
Veteran journalist and best-selling author of “The Marketing of Evil: How Radicals, Elitists, and Pseudo-Experts Sell Us Corruption Disguised As Freedom,” David Kupelian believes the rise of socialism in Europe, as well as the deterioration of Western morality, is to blame for the uphill battle Charlie’s parents are fighting.
“The whole ‘die with dignity’ phrase, however well-intentioned, is tainted with the arrogance of socialistic government that has, at least in Britain and Europe, replaced the Judeo-Christian culture that once dominated the West,” Kupelian told WND. “In that culture, parents would have unquestioned authority over their own children, unless they were severely abusive, criminal or insane.”
“Wh**ever happened to common sense?” he continued. “Charlie’s parents, who love him, are obviously responsible people, and who have raised over a million dollars for their baby’s care, have the natural right to take him to another hospital, even one in another country.”
Get David Kupelian’s culture war blockbusters, “The Marketing of Evil,” “How Evil Works” and his latest, “The Snapping of the American Mind” – autographed – at the WND Superstore. E-book and audiobook versions also available.
As to why the British government does not want to allow the parents to try and save Charlie, even though it won’t cost them a thing, Kupelian speculated that, “Perhaps the British authorities fear establishing a precedent that parents have the final authority over their children, since that notion is in mortal conflict with socialist sensibilities according to which, to quote Hillary Clinton and others, ‘It takes a village to raise a child.'”
There is a danger for stories like Charlie’s to appear whenever a country turns to socialized, single-payer healthcare provided by the government.
“Under socialized medicine, the government pays for everybody, and therefore is in control of everybody’s lives. In short, the government knows best,” Kupelian said. “That’s why Ronald Reagan warned that the surest way to completely subjugate a society under socialism was through socialized healthcare.”
An editorial at the Chicago Tribune agrees with Kupelian.
“Why does the British government have such wide authority over Charlie’s treatment?” it asked. The answer: “Because the government funds a single-payer health system, picking up medical costs for British citizens.”
The Tribune warns that the U.S. might not be so far off from Britain’s government-run healthcare, either: “Now that Obamacare is faltering, talk of a single-payer national plan has surfaced anew in Democratic circles,” it said. “[No one could] predict that a critically ill infant far from U.S. shores would provide one more reason for Americans to remain wary of a single-payer system.”
EXCLUSIVE
'Common sense' gone in denial of medical care to baby
All Charlie Gard's parents seek is permission to leave U.K. with sick son
Published: 2 hours ago
author-image
Joe Wilson About | Email | Archive
Joe Wilson is an intern with WND. He hails from Sunman, Indiana, and is finishing his bachelor's degree in History and Classical Language at Christendom College in Front Royal, Virginia. He is a devout Catholic and a baseball enthusiast, as well as an amateur filmmaker.
WASHINGTON – Very soon, Charlie Gard will die.
Barring intervention from senior officials in the British government, 11-month-old Charlie Gard, who suffers from a rare genetic disease, will have his life support withdrawn soon by officials at Great Ormond Street Hospital, where Charlie now is hospitalized, although they have not yet named a time.
Charlie’s fight for life has drawn massive sympathy from around the world, with statements of support from figures as influential as Pope Francis and President Donald Trump. But so far, the British National Health Service has given no indication that its bureaucrats will allow Charlie to live.
“We’re not allowed to choose if our son lives and we’re not allowed to choose when or where Charlie dies,” Charlie’s parents Connie Yates and Chris Gard said in a recent Facebook post. At the time, they thought Charlie’s life support would be withdrawn on June 30, but the hospital gave them an indefinite reprieve to say goodbye.
Charlie’s parents have raised close to $1.7 million to take Charlie outside of Britain for treatment.
And an American hospital has offered to treat Charlie for free.
The Papal Bambino Gesu hospital in Rome also offered to treat Charlie. However, the NHS, Britain’s single-payer healthcare system, will not let him go elsewhere receive care, even though it won’t cost a dime.
Charlie’s parents have argued for their parental rights to make the decision that is in the best interest of their son in front of many different courts, all the way up to the European Court of Human Rights. But they lost every step of the way, proving that in Europe, the state considers itself better equipped to make intensely personal decisions about the well-being of a child than his parents are.
Great Ormond Street Hospital has said Charlie should be allowed to “die with dignity,” and that its officials do not believe there is any substantial chance treatment will be able to save Charlie, who is one of only 16 people ever diagnosed with this rare mitochondrial depletion syndrome.
However, another boy diagnosed with a very similar disease in America has defied all expectations and is now six years old – after being told he had only two months to live upon being diagnosed as an infant.
An Italian child also has a similar story about beating a similar illness through treatment.
Veteran journalist and best-selling author of “The Marketing of Evil: How Radicals, Elitists, and Pseudo-Experts Sell Us Corruption Disguised As Freedom,” David Kupelian believes the rise of socialism in Europe, as well as the deterioration of Western morality, is to blame for the uphill battle Charlie’s parents are fighting.
“The whole ‘die with dignity’ phrase, however well-intentioned, is tainted with the arrogance of socialistic government that has, at least in Britain and Europe, replaced the Judeo-Christian culture that once dominated the West,” Kupelian told WND. “In that culture, parents would have unquestioned authority over their own children, unless they were severely abusive, criminal or insane.”
“Wh**ever happened to common sense?” he continued. “Charlie’s parents, who love him, are obviously responsible people, and who have raised over a million dollars for their baby’s care, have the natural right to take him to another hospital, even one in another country.”
Get David Kupelian’s culture war blockbusters, “The Marketing of Evil,” “How Evil Works” and his latest, “The Snapping of the American Mind” – autographed – at the WND Superstore. E-book and audiobook versions also available.
As to why the British government does not want to allow the parents to try and save Charlie, even though it won’t cost them a thing, Kupelian speculated that, “Perhaps the British authorities fear establishing a precedent that parents have the final authority over their children, since that notion is in mortal conflict with socialist sensibilities according to which, to quote Hillary Clinton and others, ‘It takes a village to raise a child.'”
There is a danger for stories like Charlie’s to appear whenever a country turns to socialized, single-payer healthcare provided by the government.
“Under socialized medicine, the government pays for everybody, and therefore is in control of everybody’s lives. In short, the government knows best,” Kupelian said. “That’s why Ronald Reagan warned that the surest way to completely subjugate a society under socialism was through socialized healthcare.”
An editorial at the Chicago Tribune agrees with Kupelian.
“Why does the British government have such wide authority over Charlie’s treatment?” it asked. The answer: “Because the government funds a single-payer health system, picking up medical costs for British citizens.”
The Tribune warns that the U.S. might not be so far off from Britain’s government-run healthcare, either: “Now that Obamacare is faltering, talk of a single-payer national plan has surfaced anew in Democratic circles,” it said. “[No one could] predict that a critically ill infant far from U.S. shores would provide one more reason for Americans to remain wary of a single-payer system.”
Jul 6, 2017 19:13:55 #
JFlorio
Loc: Seminole Florida
Hopefully a majority of Americans would never stand for this type of government over reach. How is this action even defendable?
no propaganda please wrote:
WND br EXCLUSIVE br 'Common sense' gone in denial ... (show quote)
Jul 6, 2017 19:29:44 #
JFlorio wrote:
Hopefully a majority of Americans would never stand for this type of government over reach. How is this action even defendable?
That action has already taken place in America or didn't you notice.
Read you ObamaCare law.
Under ObamaCare, even if you can afford to pay for your medical care, ObamCare can stop you.
Care can be denied 'even if patient is willing,' able to cover costs
http://www.wnd.com/2014/03/feds-to-cap-what-citizens-can-spend-on-own-healthcare/#0O0AOtorV6Cz1Q6h.99
Hospitals Look to Health Law, Cutting Charity
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/26/us/hospitals-look-to-health-law-cutting-charity.html?_r=0
Jul 6, 2017 20:20:07 #
no propaganda please wrote:
WND br EXCLUSIVE br 'Common sense' gone in denial ... (show quote)
I am missing something. If the treatments will not cost the British Health Service any money, how can they deny this child a chance to live? What if his parents just took him, would they be arrested?
Jul 6, 2017 21:05:13 #
Quakerwidow
Loc: Chestertown, MD
son of witless wrote:
I am missing something. If the treatments will not cost the British Health Service any money, how can they deny this child a chance to live? What if his parents just took him, would they be arrested?
If he is on life support, it would be difficult for them to take him without also taking the life support equipment.
Jul 7, 2017 05:01:48 #
Quakerwidow wrote:
If he is on life support, it would be difficult for them to take him without also taking the life support equipment.
I still do not get how they can legally stop the parents from coming to the US for treatment.
Jul 7, 2017 08:59:59 #
JFlorio
Loc: Seminole Florida
I thought you liberals see health care as a human right? If so how can you deprive a human of the lifesaving means he must have?
Quakerwidow wrote:
If he is on life support, it would be difficult for them to take him without also taking the life support equipment.
Jul 7, 2017 09:53:12 #
Quakerwidow
Loc: Chestertown, MD
JFlorio wrote:
I thought you liberals see health care as a human right? If so how can you deprive a human of the lifesaving means he must have?
Um: the QUESTION was what could prevent the parents taking the baby to America. I will assume you have never had to deal with life-support equipment. There is more than one reason those of us who have experience stipulate "No extraordinary measures." In order for the parents to relocate the child, they would also need not only the equipment but a nurse and a technician for the equipment. Logistics dictate that once on a machine, one either recovers or dies hooked to that same machine in that location.
Jul 7, 2017 10:06:23 #
no propaganda please wrote:
WND br EXCLUSIVE br 'Common sense' gone in denial ... (show quote)
A number of hospitals have offered, but there is no treatment and the parents have asked to remove the child from the hospital and take him home to die. Nobody understands how they feel. National Health Care in England seems to own this baby and if you want government controlling care in this country, this is what you get. Make your choice today.
Jul 7, 2017 10:32:22 #
JFlorio
Loc: Seminole Florida
Um: They have raised over a million dollars. I am sure it can be done. Guarantee it would be done for the Queens grandchild.
Quakerwidow wrote:
Um: the QUESTION was what could prevent the parent... (show quote)
Jul 7, 2017 15:17:46 #
Consider that poor charlie is at this time deaf and blind.. A machine is breathing for him.
The treatment in the US is an experiment .. they want him as a lab pig..
the heart break of the parents is beyond what I can imagine. I also think parents should have the last say in efforts to save a child..
But it also seems that in this case, living would not be good for that poor little child..
The treatment in the US is an experiment .. they want him as a lab pig..
the heart break of the parents is beyond what I can imagine. I also think parents should have the last say in efforts to save a child..
But it also seems that in this case, living would not be good for that poor little child..
Jul 7, 2017 20:21:35 #
Maybe extending his little life and the experimental treatment could benefit someone, somewhere, sometime in the future.
Jul 7, 2017 20:31:51 #
2wheeljunkie wrote:
Maybe extending his little life and the experimental treatment could benefit someone, somewhere, sometime in the future.
If the American hospital believes there is a chance to save him, what is the rationale for refusal? Suffering?
Jul 7, 2017 21:40:58 #
son of witless wrote:
If the American hospital believes there is a chance to save him, what is the rationale for refusal? Suffering?
I saw the story, heartbreaking, I don't know why they are taking the position they are, but it's sad and reprehensible.
Jul 7, 2017 22:39:19 #
JFlorio wrote:
Hopefully a majority of Americans would never stand for this type of government over reach. How is this action even defendable?
The sad thing is they put up with the blatant, unprecedented overreach by Obama for 8 long years. But I guess it wasn't a majority, just a vocal minority
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.