5 Year Old Cancer Patient Abducted By Parents From Hospital!
Discussion
Breadvan72 said:
What concerns me is the authoritarian mindset indicated by the hospital and the police.
How should they have done it differently though? Some of their language is paternalistic, but they are trying to do their best for their patient and if the parents are stopping that it does become a child protection issue. Replacing "without the consent of" with "against the advice of" sounds cuddlier but doesn't reflect the level of care required.
Bill said:
Eclassy said:
BS.... You know what I mean by 'fry your brain' basic radiotheraphy would have damaged surrounding tissue which will inturn lead to other organ failure. PBT minimises this risk.
Where are you getting this from?Bill said:
Where are you getting this from?
The internet!Some on here keep going on about PBT not being proven yet our own Govt spends about £25M a year sending people abroad for this treatment and are spending £350M to build and run 2 PBT centres in the UK. Keep lying to yourselves if it makes you feel better.
Damn those health professionals wasting all that money on PBT quackery.
Finally it is the King's right to choose an alternative treatment for their son.
Eclassy said:
The internet!
Some on here keep going on about PBT not being proven yet our own Govt spends about £25M a year sending people abroad for this treatment and are spending £350M to build and run 2 PBT centres in the UK. Keep lying to yourselves if it makes you feel better.
Damn those health professionals wasting all that money on PBT quackery.
Finally it is the King's right to choose an alternative treatment for their son.
No sSome on here keep going on about PBT not being proven yet our own Govt spends about £25M a year sending people abroad for this treatment and are spending £350M to build and run 2 PBT centres in the UK. Keep lying to yourselves if it makes you feel better.
Damn those health professionals wasting all that money on PBT quackery.
Finally it is the King's right to choose an alternative treatment for their son.
t! Show me a link. PBT is proven to be better in some cases. In others it has no benefits over conventional radiotherapy. Which is why the NHS don't fund all cases. No one is saying it is unproven.
See above.
It is. Which is why Southampton was fine with their decision to fund PBT in the Czech Republic. They weren't so keen on a completely unnecessary move to Spain, particularly as it was done in the family car.
Bill said:
No st! Show me a link.
PBT is proven to be better in some cases. In others it has no benefits over conventional radiotherapy. Which is why the NHS don't fund all cases. No one is saying it is unproven.
See above.
It is. Which is why Southampton was fine with their decision to fund PBT in the Czech Republic. They weren't so keen on a completely unnecessary move to Spain, particularly as it was done in the family car.
The references to woo and quackery in this thread are referring to the kind of stuff being spouted howe PBT is wonderful andwill definitely help Ashya King ... t! Show me a link. PBT is proven to be better in some cases. In others it has no benefits over conventional radiotherapy. Which is why the NHS don't fund all cases. No one is saying it is unproven.
See above.
It is. Which is why Southampton was fine with their decision to fund PBT in the Czech Republic. They weren't so keen on a completely unnecessary move to Spain, particularly as it was done in the family car.
I still can;t work out what the reasoning for the move to spain was other than the Flounce on behlaf of Mr and Mrs King , seemingly when they were not told what they *wanted* to hear ...
Bill said:
No st! Show me a link.
PBT is proven to be better in some cases. In others it has no benefits over conventional radiotherapy. Which is why the NHS don't fund all cases. No one is saying it is unproven.
See above.
It is. Which is why Southampton was fine with their decision to fund PBT in the Czech Republic. They weren't so keen on a completely unnecessary move to Spain, particularly as it was done in the family car.
Thats what the hospital told Rosalie Barnes. PBT will be no good. She refused their advice and privately paid for PBT in America. That was 4 years ago. Her son is much better today and doing stuff other kids his age do (it could be that this would have been the same case with standard radiotheraphy)t! Show me a link. PBT is proven to be better in some cases. In others it has no benefits over conventional radiotherapy. Which is why the NHS don't fund all cases. No one is saying it is unproven.
See above.
It is. Which is why Southampton was fine with their decision to fund PBT in the Czech Republic. They weren't so keen on a completely unnecessary move to Spain, particularly as it was done in the family car.
If Soton was fine with privately funded PBT treatment in Prague and communicated this to the Kings, why would they have removed him from the hospital? I think I believe Mr King
The only reason I can think of is they did it to delibrately generate public interest so they can get the donations that are pouring in. Being a parent myself, I seriously doubt that.
I already gave my personal example of my experience where GPs on 4 visits refused to offer the oral treatment for scalp ring worm as advised on the NHS's very own website and continued to prescribe the same cream which was having no effect. (I still think the NHS is the best hehlth service in the world)
Bill said:
Breadvan72 said:
What concerns me is the authoritarian mindset indicated by the hospital and the police.
How should they have done it differently though? Some of their language is paternalistic, but they are trying to do their best for their patient and if the parents are stopping that it does become a child protection issue. Replacing "without the consent of" with "against the advice of" sounds cuddlier but doesn't reflect the level of care required.
Eclassy said:
Thats what the hospital told Rosalie Barnes. PBT will be no good. She refused their advice and privately paid for PBT in America. That was 4 years ago. Her son is much better today and doing stuff other kids his age do (it could be that this would have been the same case with standard radiotheraphy)
PBT is "no good"? Or no better for her child?
If Soton was fine with privately funded PBT treatment in Prague and communicated this to the Kings, why would they have removed him from the hospital? I think I believe Mr King
As ever there are two sides to every story. I suspect neither side dealt with this well, and as professionals the hospital should have done better. The hospital knows that the Kings can't afford the PBT immediately and treatment needs to crack on to have the best effect. I'm guessing that the Kings wanted to delay treatment until they've got the money, the hospital tried persuasion and mentioned control orders when that failed. And the rest is history.
The only reason I can think of is they did it to delibrately generate public interest so they can get the donations that are pouring in. Being a parent myself, I seriously doubt that.
See above. It looks like the Czech PBT centre will treat now and expect money later, which suggests cracking on is important.
I already gave my personal example of my experience where GPs on 4 visits refused to offer the oral treatment for scalp ring worm as advised on the NHS's very own website and continued to prescribe the same cream which was having no effect. (I still think the NHS is the best hehlth service in the world)
So you're trying to second guess a specialist oncology team because your GP isn't up to date with ringworm treatment?PBT is "no good"? Or no better for her child?
If Soton was fine with privately funded PBT treatment in Prague and communicated this to the Kings, why would they have removed him from the hospital? I think I believe Mr King
As ever there are two sides to every story. I suspect neither side dealt with this well, and as professionals the hospital should have done better. The hospital knows that the Kings can't afford the PBT immediately and treatment needs to crack on to have the best effect. I'm guessing that the Kings wanted to delay treatment until they've got the money, the hospital tried persuasion and mentioned control orders when that failed. And the rest is history.
The only reason I can think of is they did it to delibrately generate public interest so they can get the donations that are pouring in. Being a parent myself, I seriously doubt that.
See above. It looks like the Czech PBT centre will treat now and expect money later, which suggests cracking on is important.
I already gave my personal example of my experience where GPs on 4 visits refused to offer the oral treatment for scalp ring worm as advised on the NHS's very own website and continued to prescribe the same cream which was having no effect. (I still think the NHS is the best hehlth service in the world)
Have a look at this: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23473686
Bill said:
Agreed, and the European arrest warrant in particular was way over the top, but they can't just ignore the fact that some parents have removed their seriously ill child against medical advice when they have no idea how prepared they are.
Had something happened en route they'd have been trying to find a foreign A&E while on the move and distraught. The pump and feed stopped him dehydrating or starving but they had no way to deal with vomiting or an aspiration, his temperature control is probably way off, he's physically weakened post surgery and there were six(?) of them wedged in an MPV. What they did was very risky, and for absolutely no benefit.
People here have compared this to the McCanns. They took a small risk which, one way or another, went badly wrong. The Kings took a vastly bigger risk but (thankfully) got away with it.
The McCanns took a massive risk, not a small one. They took the same risk night after night and sadly their daughter paid the price for her parents' selfishness and stupidity. Still, that's a whole other topic for a whole other thread...Had something happened en route they'd have been trying to find a foreign A&E while on the move and distraught. The pump and feed stopped him dehydrating or starving but they had no way to deal with vomiting or an aspiration, his temperature control is probably way off, he's physically weakened post surgery and there were six(?) of them wedged in an MPV. What they did was very risky, and for absolutely no benefit.
People here have compared this to the McCanns. They took a small risk which, one way or another, went badly wrong. The Kings took a vastly bigger risk but (thankfully) got away with it.
I would argue that the risk taken by the Kings has, ultimately, been beneficial for their son as he now he has a greater chance of successfully being treated than he had previously.
mph1977 said:
I see the McCann Paradox at play again ...
Not sure where that one keeps coming from as I see very few people here saying what the McCann's did was right - quite the opposite most people think the only reason they aren't on the end of a child neglect charge is because they aren't Kyle and Tracy from Dewsbury.I think a lot of this comes down to language, the hospital are still using phrases such as "Ashya’s family chose to remove him without informing or seeking the consent of medical staff." - should they have told the hospital, yes I think they should, but AIUI they didn't need their consent, so why make it sound as if they did something wrong by not asking for it?
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Not sure where that one keeps coming from as I see very few people here saying what the McCann's did was right - quite the opposite most people think the only reason they aren't on the end of a child neglect charge is because they aren't Kyle and Tracy from Dewsbury.
I think a lot of this comes down to language, the hospital are still using phrases such as "Ashya’s family chose to remove him without informing or seeking the consent of medical staff." - should they have told the hospital, yes I think they should, but AIUI they didn't need their consent, so why make it sound as if they did something wrong by not asking for it?
According to the Father he did advise them he would be taking his son out of there care.Think the NHS smear dept is on full alertI think a lot of this comes down to language, the hospital are still using phrases such as "Ashya’s family chose to remove him without informing or seeking the consent of medical staff." - should they have told the hospital, yes I think they should, but AIUI they didn't need their consent, so why make it sound as if they did something wrong by not asking for it?
johnxjsc1985 said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Not sure where that one keeps coming from as I see very few people here saying what the McCann's did was right - quite the opposite most people think the only reason they aren't on the end of a child neglect charge is because they aren't Kyle and Tracy from Dewsbury.
I think a lot of this comes down to language, the hospital are still using phrases such as "Ashya’s family chose to remove him without informing or seeking the consent of medical staff." - should they have told the hospital, yes I think they should, but AIUI they didn't need their consent, so why make it sound as if they did something wrong by not asking for it?
According to the Father he did advise them he would be taking his son out of there care.Think the NHS smear dept is on full alertI think a lot of this comes down to language, the hospital are still using phrases such as "Ashya’s family chose to remove him without informing or seeking the consent of medical staff." - should they have told the hospital, yes I think they should, but AIUI they didn't need their consent, so why make it sound as if they did something wrong by not asking for it?
absenting yourself from in-patient care without acknowledging that you are leaving counter to the advice of the accountable clinicians does not discharge the Hospital's duty of care ...
I am unsure why people have such a difficulty in understadning the concept here.
Eclassy said:
The only reason I can think of is they did it to delibrately generate public interest so they can get the donations that are pouring in. Being a parent myself, I seriously doubt that.
An interesting theory except:1. They had no way of predicting they would be subject to an EAW
2. They had no way of predicting how the media could cover the story
3. They had no way of knowing if anyone would donate a single penny (they were initially portrayed as Jehova's Witness nut-jobs who had put their child at risk)
4. They had no way of knowing they could be the centre of a global human interest story
5. They had no way of knowing Cameron and Clegg would also join the debate
Apart from that ....
mph1977 said:
johnxjsc1985 said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Not sure where that one keeps coming from as I see very few people here saying what the McCann's did was right - quite the opposite most people think the only reason they aren't on the end of a child neglect charge is because they aren't Kyle and Tracy from Dewsbury.
I think a lot of this comes down to language, the hospital are still using phrases such as "Ashya’s family chose to remove him without informing or seeking the consent of medical staff." - should they have told the hospital, yes I think they should, but AIUI they didn't need their consent, so why make it sound as if they did something wrong by not asking for it?
According to the Father he did advise them he would be taking his son out of there care.Think the NHS smear dept is on full alertI think a lot of this comes down to language, the hospital are still using phrases such as "Ashya’s family chose to remove him without informing or seeking the consent of medical staff." - should they have told the hospital, yes I think they should, but AIUI they didn't need their consent, so why make it sound as if they did something wrong by not asking for it?
absenting yourself from in-patient care without acknowledging that you are leaving counter to the advice of the accountable clinicians does not discharge the Hospital's duty of care ...
I am unsure why people have such a difficulty in understadning the concept here.
mph1977 said:
where is the signed 'self discharge' paperwork ?
I must confess it felt wierd walking out of the maternity ward with my son, the day after he was born. Not a paper to sign, not a dime to pay. I am foreign and where I am from, you pay your way so you can understand my amazement at being just being able to stroll out of hospital after receiving such wonderful and world class service.
Eclassy said:
I am foreign and where I am from, you pay your way so you can understand my amazement at being just being able to stroll out of hospital after receiving such wonderful and world class service.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff