Rioting Scousers at Alder Hey

[Jiggerycock]

I don't see the problem with allowing the parents to take their child out of NHS care (and expense) and go wherever they wish to, to practice whatever voodoo they feel may work for them. Unless, perhaps, their chosen treatment is known to cause harm (e.g., FGM or extreme forms of exorcism), and I do have serious reservations about parents having the right to let a child die because their beliefs do not permit treatment of any kind.

Letting them remove the child and put the financial burden (sorry to put it so coldly, but there we are) elsewhere straight away would have cost the British taxpayer less than whatever the NHS and justice system are having to spend on this circus.

Giving parents that right over the power of the State would be a concern only for those to whom the State is father, mother and secret lover.

[Guest 'eavensabove]

44 minutes ago, Jiggerycock said:

I don't see the problem with allowing the parents to take their child out of NHS care (and expense) and go wherever they wish to, to practice whatever voodoo they feel may work for them. Unless, perhaps, their chosen treatment is known to cause harm (e.g., FGM or extreme forms of exorcism), and I do have serious reservations about parents having the right to let a child die because their beliefs do not permit treatment of any kind.

Letting them remove the child and put the financial burden (sorry to put it so coldly, but there we are) elsewhere straight away would have cost the British taxpayer less than whatever the NHS and justice system are having to spend on this circus.

Giving parents that right over the power of the State would be a concern only for those to whom the State is father, mother and secret lover.

Even though a few countries have offered to take the kid, all of those countries/doctors agree that there will be no cure or improvement to the kid itself. It is only because their laws allow the parents to have the kid on a life support system indefinitely which in the case of the kid it would be, save for a miracle.  As for the money, what's gonna happen to all of the cash that folks have been donating, every last penny of it? 

[Guest Lady Penelope]

1 hour ago, Jiggerycock said:

Letting them remove the child and put the financial burden (sorry to put it so coldly, but there we are) elsewhere straight away would have cost the British taxpayer less than whatever the NHS and justice system are having to spend on this circus.

It would also help shift the blame when the inevitable happens.

[Guest 'eavensabove]

4 minutes ago, Miss Penelope said:

It would also help shift the blame when the inevitable happens.

By all accounts, the kid's going home with its parents now. The ball's in their court. It will probably die from a crack overdose. 

[Jiggerycock]

41 minutes ago, 'eavensabove said:

Even though a few countries have offered to take the kid, all of those countries/doctors agree that there will be no cure or improvement to the kid itself. It is only because their laws allow the parents to have the kid on a life support system indefinitely which in the case of the kid it would be, save for a miracle.  As for the money, what's gonna happen to all of the cash that folks have been donating, every last penny of it? 

So they allow the Parents rather than the State to have ultimate control over when and how the child dies? Seems good to me.

Because whilst the media have been foaming at the mouth about the rabid Left Footer / Pro-Life mob outside Alder Hey, there seems to be an equally ideologically-led case being made by their opponents:  a 21st-century judicial overreach, in which parents’ rights are merely leased out by the state.

[Guest 'eavensabove]

2 minutes ago, Jiggerycock said:

So they allow the Parents rather than the State to have ultimate control over when and how the child dies? Seems good to me.

Because whilst the media have been foaming at the mouth about the rabid Left Footer / Pro-Life mob outside Alder Hey, there seems to be an equally ideologically-led case being made by their opponents:  a 21st-century judicial overreach, in which parents’ rights are merely leased out by the state.

In a round-about way our NHS system is 'free' and so as such the parents don't have a leg to stand on, and taking the NHS on is futile. In hindsight, the parents should have taken their child to those who have said they can assist, at the very beginning of its diagnosis. It would have saved them and the NHS & High Courts etc. bundles of cash better spent. They've been wrongly goaded into a state of desperation and clutching at straws in a losing battle from day one. 

[Stubby Pecker]

6 minutes ago, Jiggerycock said:

So they allow the Parents rather than the State to have ultimate control over when and how the child dies? Seems good to me.

Because whilst the media have been foaming at the mouth about the rabid Left Footer / Pro-Life mob outside Alder Hey, there seems to be an equally ideologically-led case being made by their opponents:  a 21st-century judicial overreach, in which parents’ rights are merely leased out by the state.

Again, one wonders what advice the parents have been given. Have they been seduced by some foreign quacks about a miracle cure or even some quality of life for the poor little bastard? If it can be proved that the child is not suffering and has a reasonable prospect of not spending his intire life as a vegetable, the latter of which is doubtful, then the parents should be allowed to decide the course of action- after receiving sound advice for a consensus of experts. They also need to be made fully aware of the life long impacts on their lives and be able to come to terms with the huge ethical dilemma of keeping this child alive artificially for no other reason than their will. What kind of life does the poor child face? No fucking life at all. 

[Jiggerycock]

20 minutes ago, Stubby Pecker said:

Again, one wonders what advice the parents have been given. Have they been seduced by some foreign quacks about a miracle cure or even some quality of life for the poor little bastard? If it can be proved that the child is not suffering and has a reasonable prospect of not spending his intire life as a vegetable, the latter of which is doubtful, then the parents should be allowed to decide the course of action- after receiving sound advice for a consensus of experts. They also need to be made fully aware of the life long impacts on their lives and be able to come to terms with the huge ethical dilemma of keeping this child alive artificially for no other reason than their will. What kind of life does the poor child face? No fucking life at all. 

It's a clusterfuck whichever way you slice it, not helped by emotive reporting and our old friend fucking social media getting its 140-byte calls for summary justice all over the show.

It comes down to ethical and moral issues, the like of which have never seen an outing on CC, that's for def'. Personally, the kid has rolled a seven but seems a tough little bugger (still hanging on in there as I write). The parents were happy with his quality of life so in that case, I'm very wary of the State making a power grab and saying, effectively, it has a greater set of rights over the kid's future.

[Earl of Punkape]

23 minutes ago, Stubby Pecker said:

If it can be proved that the child is not suffering and has a reasonable prospect of not spending his intire life as a vegetable, 

What sort of vegetable 🌽🍆🥦🍠🥕🥔  ?

lol,

Fuck off.

[The Beast]

2 hours ago, Jiggerycock said:

I don't see the problem with allowing the parents to take their child out of NHS care (and expense) and go wherever they wish to, to practice whatever voodoo they feel may work for them. Unless, perhaps, their chosen treatment is known to cause harm (e.g., FGM or extreme forms of exorcism), and I do have serious reservations about parents having the right to let a child die because their beliefs do not permit treatment of any kind.

Letting them remove the child and put the financial burden (sorry to put it so coldly, but there we are) elsewhere straight away would have cost the British taxpayer less than whatever the NHS and justice system are having to spend on this circus.

Giving parents that right over the power of the State would be a concern only for those to whom the State is father, mother and secret lover.

 

50 minutes ago, Jiggerycock said:

So they allow the Parents rather than the State to have ultimate control over when and how the child dies? Seems good to me.

Because whilst the media have been foaming at the mouth about the rabid Left Footer / Pro-Life mob outside Alder Hey, there seems to be an equally ideologically-led case being made by their opponents:  a 21st-century judicial overreach, in which parents’ rights are merely leased out by the state.

 

6 minutes ago, Jiggerycock said:

It's a clusterfuck whichever way you slice it, not helped by emotive reporting and our old friend fucking social media getting its 140-byte calls for summary justice all over the show.

It comes down to ethical and moral issues, the like of which have never seen an outing on CC, that's for def'. Personally, the kid has rolled a seven but seems a tough little bugger (still hanging on in there as I write). The parents were happy with his quality of life so in that case, I'm very wary of the State making a power grab and saying, effectively, it has a greater set of rights over the kid's future.

 The state has a duty to safeguard every child through The Children's Act. The best interests of the child are paramount and this has been upheld by the law. 

The pope can fuck off.

[Guest Lady Penelope]

16 minutes ago, Jiggerycock said:

our old friend fucking social media getting its 140-byte calls for summary justice all over the show.

It is also a feeding frenzy for click-bait. There are quite a few like and share cunts at it.

[Cuntybaws]

2 hours ago, The Beast said:

The pope can fuck off.

Smack bang in the middle of the intersection on the Venn diagram of things we agree on.

[Jiggerycock]

5 hours ago, The Beast said:

 

 

 The state has a duty to safeguard every child through The Children's Act. The best interests of the child are paramount and this has been upheld by the law. 

The pope can fuck off.

Then The Children's Act (along with the Pope) can fuck off too - and take with it Labour's Criminal Justice Act 2003 and it's fucked up definition of a hate crime that made flesh the warnings of George Orwell

[Cap'n Cunt]

I don't understand what all the fuss is about. It's a fucking spacker, it'll always be a spacker. Kill the fucking thing now, otherwise it'll spoil the runup to that Prince/darkie wedding thing.

[Guest White van man]

18 minutes ago, Cap'n Cunt said:

I don't understand what all the fuss is about. It's a fucking spacker, it'll always be a spacker. Kill the fucking thing now, otherwise it'll spoil the runup to that Prince/darkie wedding thing.

Most of them liverpool crowd are brain dead. It's just a normal scouser to them.

[Eric Cuntman]

26 minutes ago, White van man said:

Most of them liverpool crowd are brain dead. It's just a normal scouser to them.

In the late 90s, I spent a week living in Liverpool and working on the door of one of their shit nightclubs. And I can categorically state that they have the manners of pigs and are incapable of flushing a toilet behind them. 

[Guest Lady Penelope]

3 minutes ago, Eric Cuntman said:

In the late 90s, I spent a week living in Liverpool and working on the door of one of their shit nightclubs. And I can categorically state that they have the manners of pigs and are incapable of flushing a toilet behind them. 

You have clearly never met Mankies .. scousers are pussy cats compared.

[Eric Cuntman]

7 minutes ago, Miss Penelope said:

You have clearly never met Mankies .. scousers are pussy cats compared.

No, I must admit, I have limited experience of Mancunians. But media exposure of the Gallagher brothers leads me to the conclusion that you may well have a point.

[Guest 'eavensabove]

1 hour ago, Eric Cuntman said:

In the late 90s, I spent a week living in Liverpool and working on the door of one of their shit nightclubs. And I can categorically state that they have the manners of pigs and are incapable of flushing a toilet behind them. 

... that's coz they use Sudoku bog roll which is useless for them. They fill in the number ones, but not the number twos. 

[The Beast]

5 hours ago, Jiggerycock said:

Then The Children's Act (along with the Pope) can fuck off too - and take with it Labour's Criminal Justice Act 2003 and it's fucked up definition of a hate crime that made flesh the warnings of George Orwell

I agree the point about hate crime laws in UK plc, but you are conflating two things here.

Are you suggesting that a well renowned paediatric hospital doesn't want to protect the interests of a terminally ill child? Or worse, are you suggesting we should go back to pre 1889 when children had absolutely no rights whatsoever?

[Guest Lady Penelope]

The little boy died during the night.

[Jiggerycock]

7 hours ago, The Beast said:

I agree the point about hate crime laws in UK plc, but you are conflating two things here.

Are you suggesting that a well renowned paediatric hospital doesn't want to protect the interests of a terminally ill child? Or worse, are you suggesting we should go back to pre 1889 when children had absolutely no rights whatsoever?

I'm suggesting that parents - generally - know what's best for their kids (despite high-profile fuck ups, which we can all point to and remember).

 

[Guest Earl Albert of Ross (Bt)]

7 minutes ago, Miss Penelope said:

The little boy died during the night.

Why does one small boy take up all this media space? There are grieving parents every day losing their "little gladiators", but not all parents are from the City of Eternal Grief. LFC are playing in Rome next week, the Guidos still want revenge for their 32-0 loss in 1985.

[Guest Lady Penelope]

26 minutes ago, Albert Ross Esquire said:

Why does one small boy take up all this media space? There are grieving parents every day losing their "little gladiators", but not all parents are from the City of Eternal Grief. LFC are playing in Rome next week, the Guidos still want revenge for their 32-0 loss in 1985.

TBH I know Liverpool fairly well, it is a much better place than Mankyland.

[The Beast]

1 hour ago, Jiggerycock said:

I'm suggesting that parents - generally - know what's best for their kids (despite high-profile fuck ups, which we can all point to and remember).

 

Agree, generally they do.

And generally, they are not paediatric neurologists.