5 Year Old Cancer Patient Abducted By Parents From Hospital!
Discussion
McWigglebum4th said:
mph1977 said:
As is typical for PH the powerfully built conflation machine is in full effect.
While Proton beam therapy is effective, we do not know if this is the case for the type and location of residual tumour in this case.
My comments with regard to quackery and woo were in relation to the pi ture being painted of other treatment options.
I also do wonder if Mr King has an u realistic expectation of the progress and prognosis of proton beam vs other treatment options. Regardless of the treatment options the prognosis and recovery rate and time from the Brain Injuries sustained as a result of the tumour and the surgical procedure is going to be highly variable.
Proton Beam is not going to magically give them their little boy back as he was pre tumour.
And the state taking over his child and putting him into care while throwing the parents in jail is a better solutionWhile Proton beam therapy is effective, we do not know if this is the case for the type and location of residual tumour in this case.
My comments with regard to quackery and woo were in relation to the pi ture being painted of other treatment options.
I also do wonder if Mr King has an u realistic expectation of the progress and prognosis of proton beam vs other treatment options. Regardless of the treatment options the prognosis and recovery rate and time from the Brain Injuries sustained as a result of the tumour and the surgical procedure is going to be highly variable.
Proton Beam is not going to magically give them their little boy back as he was pre tumour.
PB treatment is proving to be fairly effective and certainly worth a try in many cases. The fact that the NHS tends to avoid its use, mainly for reasons of cost v benefit not just on whether it might help or not, is a sad, but not unusual reflection on today's NHS.
This episode is a sad reflection on our public services in general.
^^^^
They took him out of a UK hospital for 2 reasons
1. To stop the dictator doctors from starting radiotheraphy on him which would have turned him into a vegetable.
2. To stop the dictator doctors from taking their child away. They had been threatned with it if they dared raise objections to the nazi doctors starting brain damaging radiation on him.
I respect the NHS and I think it is the best health service in the world but IMHO opinion the doctors have failed this family.
My son had scalp ringworm and I took him to see the GP. They prescribed a cream which was not to be used for longer than a week. After 2 weeks and seeing no improvement, I read up on the condition online. The NHS website clearly advocates oral medicine treatment for the condition. I returned to the GP but was told it wasnt necessary. He was prescribed another of those creams that say not to use for longer than a week. After 4 months, a further 2 visits where he was precribed yet the same type of 1 week cream and no improvement of his condition, I refused to return to see the GP.
I sought alternative oral herbal medication and like magic, his condition improved and in a month his hair had grown back.
They took him out of a UK hospital for 2 reasons
1. To stop the dictator doctors from starting radiotheraphy on him which would have turned him into a vegetable.
2. To stop the dictator doctors from taking their child away. They had been threatned with it if they dared raise objections to the nazi doctors starting brain damaging radiation on him.
I respect the NHS and I think it is the best health service in the world but IMHO opinion the doctors have failed this family.
My son had scalp ringworm and I took him to see the GP. They prescribed a cream which was not to be used for longer than a week. After 2 weeks and seeing no improvement, I read up on the condition online. The NHS website clearly advocates oral medicine treatment for the condition. I returned to the GP but was told it wasnt necessary. He was prescribed another of those creams that say not to use for longer than a week. After 4 months, a further 2 visits where he was precribed yet the same type of 1 week cream and no improvement of his condition, I refused to return to see the GP.
I sought alternative oral herbal medication and like magic, his condition improved and in a month his hair had grown back.
technogogo said:
But some doctors are always better than no doctors to a critically sick child.
I suggest asking the surviving patients or relatives at Stafforshire hospital, if that statement is true.The child is the responsibility of the parent, not the state. The parent is lucid and informed enough to make the choice on what is best for their child. The state is imposing its will in a unnecessary heavy handed manner. You must listen to us or else ! Big brother knows best.
A case in point, I contracted Malaria, knew the symptoms and the most current treatment for it. My NHS doctor thought he knew best, giving me a treatment which is 15 years out of date. I refused it and then had to prove to him, the medical professional, what I was asking for, is actually the currently accepted treatment for Malaria. He had to resort to Google to verify what I was saying. If this was my child and I refused his dated treatment for a life threatening illness, should I be arrested ?
Does the NHS know best ? No, the NHS knows what is cheapest.
QuantumTokoloshi said:
The child is the responsibility of the parent, not the state.
That is only partially correct. After all, children get taken into care against the wishes of their parents if the state decides the parents aren't up to the job.If a child has a potentially fatal condition which can be easily fixed by, say, a blood transfusion the parents do not have the right to say it's against their religion and let the child die. The courts will intervene to make sure proper treatment is given "in the best interests of the child".
Qwert1e said:
That is only partially correct. After all, children get taken into care against the wishes of their parents if the state decides the parents aren't up to the job.
If a child has a potentially fatal condition which can be easily fixed by, say, a blood transfusion the parents do not have the right to say it's against their religion and let the child die. The courts will intervene to make sure proper treatment is given "in the best interests of the child".
But until the courts intervene, taking a child out of hospital is the perogative of the parent.If a child has a potentially fatal condition which can be easily fixed by, say, a blood transfusion the parents do not have the right to say it's against their religion and let the child die. The courts will intervene to make sure proper treatment is given "in the best interests of the child".
Despite the media agenda of pushing the JW line, we know there was no such worry as little Ashya's case was about the type of radiotheraphy he received after surgery.
Since there was no such order preventing the King's from taking their child out of hospital, on what grounds have they been arrested? The recently released video shows there is obviously no child neglect taking place.
What crime will they be seeking extradition for. The Spanish judiciary surely wouldnt be stupid enough to grant such an extradition request. Of course they will. It is probably a rubber stamping exercise these days. Favour for a favour type stuff. Little wonder Assange remains holed up.
How effective was the treatment being "offered" by the NHS?
I see things like this "A survey of 128 US cancer doctors found that if they contracted cancer, more than 80 per cent would not have chemotherapy as the "risks and side effects far outweighed the likely benefits". You have to work out what´s best for you and your type and grade of cancer" and s**t meself.
I see things like this "A survey of 128 US cancer doctors found that if they contracted cancer, more than 80 per cent would not have chemotherapy as the "risks and side effects far outweighed the likely benefits". You have to work out what´s best for you and your type and grade of cancer" and s**t meself.
Eclassy said:
Since there was no such order preventing the King's from taking their child out of hospital, on what grounds have they been arrested? The recently released video shows there is obviously no child neglect taking place.
An order may well be in place with a no publicity clause?Qwert1e said:
That is only partially correct. After all, children get taken into care against the wishes of their parents if the state decides the parents aren't up to the job.
If a child has a potentially fatal condition which can be easily fixed by, say, a blood transfusion the parents do not have the right to say it's against their religion and let the child die. The courts will intervene to make sure proper treatment is given "in the best interests of the child".
The parents in this case are acting rationally, they do not want the treatment being forced on the child by the doctor. The treatment being prescribed will have long term negative effects for the child. The parents prefer a less damaging procedure not offered by the NHS. The doctor does not make this choice, the parents do. The doctor is forcing them to have a specific treatment or have your child removed.If a child has a potentially fatal condition which can be easily fixed by, say, a blood transfusion the parents do not have the right to say it's against their religion and let the child die. The courts will intervene to make sure proper treatment is given "in the best interests of the child".
The craziness of the situation, is that if the parents wanted some crackpot homoeopathy treatment, that would have probably been offered on the NHS without getting them arrested.
The state in the UK seems to be operating purely for it own interest.
Foppo said:
Parents arrested is the answer according to the authorities.
The more I see coppers on the television spouting their nonsense I despair.
They should have been more vigilant in Rotherham.
Slight difference here.The more I see coppers on the television spouting their nonsense I despair.
They should have been more vigilant in Rotherham.
The second there was a live report that a child had been nicked from a hoispitals the focus was always going to be on the Police to get him back - and indeed the media coverage grew and grew until it ended up the main story with live updates.
The Police were also in the position, I assume, of not knowing exactly the parents side of the story.
The Police reaction was never goign to be different because if it was we would be hearing about how they had been negligent (again).
Qwert1e said:
That is only partially correct. After all, children get taken into care against the wishes of their parents if the state decides the parents aren't up to the job.
If a child has a potentially fatal condition which can be easily fixed by, say, a blood transfusion the parents do not have the right to say it's against their religion and let the child die. The courts will intervene to make sure proper treatment is given "in the best interests of the child".
The best interest of the child should not be determined on the determination of a single person, which it is inthis case. The parents are not making this determination based on religion, but efficacy and potential harmful side effects of NHS offered treatment.If a child has a potentially fatal condition which can be easily fixed by, say, a blood transfusion the parents do not have the right to say it's against their religion and let the child die. The courts will intervene to make sure proper treatment is given "in the best interests of the child".
QuantumTokoloshi said:
I suggest asking the surviving patients or relatives at Stafforshire hospital, if that statement is true.
The child is the responsibility of the parent, not the state. The parent is lucid and informed enough to make the choice on what is best for their child. The state is imposing its will in a unnecessary heavy handed manner. You must listen to us or else ! Big brother knows best.
A case in point, I contracted Malaria, knew the symptoms and the most current treatment for it. My NHS doctor thought he knew best, giving me a treatment which is 15 years out of date. I refused it and then had to prove to him, the medical professional, what I was asking for, is actually the currently accepted treatment for Malaria. He had to resort to Google to verify what I was saying. If this was my child and I refused his dated treatment for a life threatening illness, should I be arrested ?
Does the NHS know best ? No, the NHS knows what is cheapest.
Good for you. Presumably you would not have asked your parents to take you to Spain at the crucial juncture? Nor been happy had they insisted!The child is the responsibility of the parent, not the state. The parent is lucid and informed enough to make the choice on what is best for their child. The state is imposing its will in a unnecessary heavy handed manner. You must listen to us or else ! Big brother knows best.
A case in point, I contracted Malaria, knew the symptoms and the most current treatment for it. My NHS doctor thought he knew best, giving me a treatment which is 15 years out of date. I refused it and then had to prove to him, the medical professional, what I was asking for, is actually the currently accepted treatment for Malaria. He had to resort to Google to verify what I was saying. If this was my child and I refused his dated treatment for a life threatening illness, should I be arrested ?
Does the NHS know best ? No, the NHS knows what is cheapest.
loafer123 said:
Except the doctors threatened to take out a court order if they pursued other treatments....I think they were pushed into a corner by their doctors, and took their son out of the doctor's hands while they still had the chance.
I think they pushed their doctors into a corner. The facts are likely to be it was half a dozen of one and six of the other.They didn't go to a private hospital. They didn't go to another NHS hospital. They don't seem to have put their house on the market. They don't seem to have opened dialog with alternative healthcare providers. They FLED to Spain avoiding airports. Simple as.
The BBC's reporting of this on the radio has incrementally backed off the parents...
It started off as "Abducted".
[at the time I was puzzled as to how both the parents acting together could abduct their own child, in the absence of a court order]
Then yesterday evening/this morning it became "taken without Doctors consent".
And now this afternoon it was "removed against Doctors' advice".
Hopefully the authorities will back off in a similar manner and allow them to get him the best treatment.
It started off as "Abducted".
[at the time I was puzzled as to how both the parents acting together could abduct their own child, in the absence of a court order]
Then yesterday evening/this morning it became "taken without Doctors consent".
And now this afternoon it was "removed against Doctors' advice".
Hopefully the authorities will back off in a similar manner and allow them to get him the best treatment.
technogogo said:
I think they pushed their doctors into a corner. The facts are likely to be it was half a dozen of one and six of the other.
They didn't go to a private hospital. They didn't go to another NHS hospital. They don't seem to have put their house on the market. They don't seem to have opened dialog with alternative healthcare providers. They FLED to Spain avoiding airports. Simple as.
1. Of what use would it have been going to another NHS/private hospital? Proton Beam treatment isnt currently offered in the UK.They didn't go to a private hospital. They didn't go to another NHS hospital. They don't seem to have put their house on the market. They don't seem to have opened dialog with alternative healthcare providers. They FLED to Spain avoiding airports. Simple as.
2. It is cheaper to drive a family of 8 to spain than fly. I believe they took the decision to go abroad in the past few days when it became obvious the doctors were going to go ahead with the radiotherapy they didnt want.
3. How do you know their house isnt on the market? Ha! You didnt find it on Rightmove.
4. They didnt FLEE. Until a court order is obtained, parents have the right to remove their child from hospital and seek alternative treatment.
hornetrider said:
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: Apologies if I'm simply not looking, but what's the offence they're attempting to have them extradited for?
I believe it's something along the lines of not kowtowing to "the establishment" knows what is best for you dressed up as child neglect so it looks better in the press. There are comments on here about the pharmaceutical industry, Only today i was reading yet again of the links between HRT and breast cancer also raised incidence after using the pill, i also read some Canadian studies along the same lines.
Does it not surprise anyone that the pharmaceutical industry can always 'sell' you a cure by insisting you take another pill to cure the side effects of one pill and so the cycle seems to continue.
technogogo said:
loafer123 said:
Except the doctors threatened to take out a court order if they pursued other treatments....I think they were pushed into a corner by their doctors, and took their son out of the doctor's hands while they still had the chance.
I think they pushed their doctors into a corner. The facts are likely to be it was half a dozen of one and six of the other.They didn't go to a private hospital. They didn't go to another NHS hospital. They don't seem to have put their house on the market. They don't seem to have opened dialog with alternative healthcare providers. They FLED to Spain avoiding airports. Simple as.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff