Discussion
poo at Paul's said:
Ah the mother has "stormed" out of court today. Clearly the ratings were waivering, (as evidenced by this thread being on page 4!LOL)
FFS, just a bunch of jokers now.
Might have heard wrong, and it's probably only pedancy, but I heard on 5Live that it was the dad that stormed out, after shouting "Evil!!" at the person delivering the results of the MRI scan at the hearing.FFS, just a bunch of jokers now.
I wouldn't wish this situation on anyone but neither of them are really helping their case here with their treatment, both verbally and emotionally, of those who are looking after their son. It's a sad case but one can only hope that the judge's decision, apparently to be announced on Tuesday, is the final, FINAL decision.
Let the poor mite go.
The MRI scan has raised yet another red flag for me. The parents, who are by now pretty much disputing anything the hospital says, have disputed the measurement of Charlies head. The hospital would have used a CT scanner, and measured Charlies cranium using imaging techniques. It has shown, unsurprisingly, zero cranial growth.
The parents have used a tape measure, there's a pic floating around social media showing a 2cm increase in the circumference of Charlies head. In a previous post I explained that due to the condition, fluid will build up in the tissues, and as fluid builds up within the tissues surrounding his head, his head will naturally, enlarge. Once again, the parents showing proof they are being lied to, when in fact there are 2 answers to the one question; is Charlies head growing any bigger?
I haven't seen the MRI shown in court today but according to todays court transcripts, it made for "sad reading". I'd hazard a guess that it showed further neurological degeneration.
The red flag for me is the fact the parents had not seen the scan nor been briefed on its results. This will not have been through lack of effort by the hospital, but clearly medical records are being obtained by the court through injunction and there was a small window of opportunity to discuss the scan with the parents prior to the court getting hold of them.
So why were the parents not informed? They seem to be in the public eye a lot, and with the complete break down in trust it is likely they simply did not wish to engage any further with the hospital, including latest test results, due to the difference in opinions and the level of distrust. There is another possibility, that the way the campaign has snowballed, the reality of the situation may now have hit the parents, but with the huge level of backing and support, coupled with the fighting fund, they feel unable to accept the reality of the situation and instead perpetuate the myth that Charlie can be saved, he can make a full recovery and lead a normal life.
Social media has not helped this situation one iota, instead it has shown to be utterly devastating in its approach, and for protesters to be harrassing other parents of sick children at the hospital is morally reprehensible.
Judgement is due on tuesday. The judge has a lot to consider now, not just Charlie, but whether the law allows a treatment untested on mice to be given in the UK; the protection of the parents from snake oil salesmen and the high probability that a judgement to deny the snake oil will unleash a social media backlash against the hospital, and the patients using the hospital. I would not underestimate the lengths the rent a mob crowd will go to prove a point; throwing bricks through the windows of Great Ormond Street would no longer surprise me.
The parents have used a tape measure, there's a pic floating around social media showing a 2cm increase in the circumference of Charlies head. In a previous post I explained that due to the condition, fluid will build up in the tissues, and as fluid builds up within the tissues surrounding his head, his head will naturally, enlarge. Once again, the parents showing proof they are being lied to, when in fact there are 2 answers to the one question; is Charlies head growing any bigger?
I haven't seen the MRI shown in court today but according to todays court transcripts, it made for "sad reading". I'd hazard a guess that it showed further neurological degeneration.
The red flag for me is the fact the parents had not seen the scan nor been briefed on its results. This will not have been through lack of effort by the hospital, but clearly medical records are being obtained by the court through injunction and there was a small window of opportunity to discuss the scan with the parents prior to the court getting hold of them.
So why were the parents not informed? They seem to be in the public eye a lot, and with the complete break down in trust it is likely they simply did not wish to engage any further with the hospital, including latest test results, due to the difference in opinions and the level of distrust. There is another possibility, that the way the campaign has snowballed, the reality of the situation may now have hit the parents, but with the huge level of backing and support, coupled with the fighting fund, they feel unable to accept the reality of the situation and instead perpetuate the myth that Charlie can be saved, he can make a full recovery and lead a normal life.
Social media has not helped this situation one iota, instead it has shown to be utterly devastating in its approach, and for protesters to be harrassing other parents of sick children at the hospital is morally reprehensible.
Judgement is due on tuesday. The judge has a lot to consider now, not just Charlie, but whether the law allows a treatment untested on mice to be given in the UK; the protection of the parents from snake oil salesmen and the high probability that a judgement to deny the snake oil will unleash a social media backlash against the hospital, and the patients using the hospital. I would not underestimate the lengths the rent a mob crowd will go to prove a point; throwing bricks through the windows of Great Ormond Street would no longer surprise me.
Vital time spent storming in, around and out of court is time that could be spent with their terminally ill son; I am confident however that they are too stupid to ever appreciate that.
The pair of them are completely incapable of dealing with the inevitable in anything other than a destructive way, and this will be the beginning of a downward spiral for them. Sad but true.
The pair of them are completely incapable of dealing with the inevitable in anything other than a destructive way, and this will be the beginning of a downward spiral for them. Sad but true.
Wiccan of Darkness said:
Social media has not helped this situation one iota, instead it has shown to be utterly devastating in its approach, and for protesters to be harrassing other parents of sick children at the hospital is morally reprehensible.
Despicable, genuinely shameful - how can people even bring themselves to act like that and try to justify it?GCH said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
That's the great irony. In the States, even if the family had insurance, cover would have been pulled ages ago and he would have been long since dead, without a murmur from anyone. And with no insurance, dead even sooner. And they have the brass neck to claim Charlie is being murdered by the state and this is what happens when you have socialised healthcare.
Yep....that is pretty much how the loons who are anti-healthcare reform are spinning it here. They took the story off of the website fairly quickly when the penny dropped
I'm as right wing as any on here, but I am very glad that health in the UK is not based on the depth of your pockets.
FN2TypeR said:
Despicable, genuinely shameful - how can people even bring themselves to act like that and try to justify it?
It's wrong, you can't justify it, but then I think it's shameful and can't be justified how some people on here are rounding on the parents who, however misguided, are only acting in what they feel are the best interests of their son.bhstewie said:
FN2TypeR said:
Despicable, genuinely shameful - how can people even bring themselves to act like that and try to justify it?
It's wrong, you can't justify it, but then I think it's shameful and can't be justified how some people on here are rounding on the parents who, however misguided, are only acting in what they feel are the best interests of their son.Can you imagine the stress that they must be under, it must be horrendous for them.
bhstewie said:
FN2TypeR said:
Despicable, genuinely shameful - how can people even bring themselves to act like that and try to justify it?
It's wrong, you can't justify it, but then I think it's shameful and can't be justified how some people on here are rounding on the parents who, however misguided, are only acting in what they feel are the best interests of their son.People who beat and mutilate their kids deserve our criticism and the law thinks so too which is why that kind of thing is illegal.
That's not what's happening here though, it's two parents who may be misguided but who want the best for their child when the medical evidence would suggest there is no hope.
I may not agree with the parents and I don't have children and haven't been in their situation so can't imagine how they feel but I know from other past experiences (not on a vaguely similar scale) that stress makes you do daft stuff and doesn't make you act rationally and you simply don't know it at the time.
Say you disagree with them, say you think they're wrong, but some of the stuff I've read on here such as suggesting deporting them, or deporting Charlie, or how they're just in it for the money etc. goes way beyond that.
That's not what's happening here though, it's two parents who may be misguided but who want the best for their child when the medical evidence would suggest there is no hope.
I may not agree with the parents and I don't have children and haven't been in their situation so can't imagine how they feel but I know from other past experiences (not on a vaguely similar scale) that stress makes you do daft stuff and doesn't make you act rationally and you simply don't know it at the time.
Say you disagree with them, say you think they're wrong, but some of the stuff I've read on here such as suggesting deporting them, or deporting Charlie, or how they're just in it for the money etc. goes way beyond that.
bhstewie said:
Say you disagree with them, say you think they're wrong, but some of the stuff I've read on here such as suggesting deporting them, or deporting Charlie, or how they're just in it for the money etc. goes way beyond that.
My comment about deporting Charlie was tongue in cheek, as it had been said he'd been given American citizenship. As regards the parents' motives, lets see how the next few years unravel. If the book is out for Christmas, or a spot on some reality tv tripe is secured, then we'll have our answer. TwigtheWonderkid said:
I take your point, but parents who, in reality, are not doing what's best for their children, should not be immune to criticism just because they think they are. Ultimately, there are parents who allow FGM on their daughters, or beat or mistreat their kids in other ways, because they genuinely think it's in the best long term interests of their kids. They are wrong, and deserved to be criticised for their actions.
Despicable post.Sylvaforever said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
I take your point, but parents who, in reality, are not doing what's best for their children, should not be immune to criticism just because they think they are. Ultimately, there are parents who allow FGM on their daughters, or beat or mistreat their kids in other ways, because they genuinely think it's in the best long term interests of their kids. They are wrong, and deserved to be criticised for their actions.
Despicable post.Appalling.
GOSH staff now receiving death threats. WTF is wrong with people? http://news.sky.com/story/great-ormond-street-staf...
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Sylvaforever said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
I take your point, but parents who, in reality, are not doing what's best for their children, should not be immune to criticism just because they think they are. Ultimately, there are parents who allow FGM on their daughters, or beat or mistreat their kids in other ways, because they genuinely think it's in the best long term interests of their kids. They are wrong, and deserved to be criticised for their actions.
Despicable post.Appalling.
Vizsla said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Sylvaforever said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
I take your point, but parents who, in reality, are not doing what's best for their children, should not be immune to criticism just because they think they are. Ultimately, there are parents who allow FGM on their daughters, or beat or mistreat their kids in other ways, because they genuinely think it's in the best long term interests of their kids. They are wrong, and deserved to be criticised for their actions.
Despicable post.Appalling.
GloverMart said:
It does these days, Vizsla. You just have to go on Facebook pages dedicated to Charlie Gard to find people chased off there abusively for even the merest hint that the parents should let him go. Anyone that wants to talk calm and collectedly about the situation is hounded off.
Is social media a contributor to mob rule? Seems so. carl_w said:
GloverMart said:
It does these days, Vizsla. You just have to go on Facebook pages dedicated to Charlie Gard to find people chased off there abusively for even the merest hint that the parents should let him go. Anyone that wants to talk calm and collectedly about the situation is hounded off.
Is social media a contributor to mob rule? Seems so. Sylvaforever said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
I take your point, but parents who, in reality, are not doing what's best for their children, should not be immune to criticism just because they think they are. Ultimately, there are parents who allow FGM on their daughters, or beat or mistreat their kids in other ways, because they genuinely think it's in the best long term interests of their kids. They are wrong, and deserved to be criticised for their actions.
Despicable post.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff