Discussion
Cold said:
IIIRestorerIII said:
GloverMart said:
Interestingly enough, their spokesman Alasdair Seton-Marsden (failed UKIP candidate for Chelsea & Fulham) was condemning the behaviour of those protesting at the hospital on July 14th, saying the family abhor violence.
After a "bad" week in court, and with the possibility of more news going against them on Tuesday, all of a sudden it's a "cynical ploy" from the hospital.
IMO, getting this slimy, smarmy prick involved was one bad move from the family. You wonder how much is coming from the parents mouths and how much is actually his idea.
Just to clear up, Charlie's family put out a statement distancing themselves from Alasdair.After a "bad" week in court, and with the possibility of more news going against them on Tuesday, all of a sudden it's a "cynical ploy" from the hospital.
IMO, getting this slimy, smarmy prick involved was one bad move from the family. You wonder how much is coming from the parents mouths and how much is actually his idea.
Re Charlie. One final thought - if as the parents have said all along that Charlie is stable, not getting any worse and has a chance of getting better, why has the "window of opportunity" gone? If he's no worse now than what he was a few weeks back, what's stopping them continuing? I am glad they have called a halt to all of this but saying that the opportunity has gone now seems to suggest they've accepted he's getting worse, surely?
GloverMart said:
Fair play to the parents, that's a good statement. Wonder how many people like me he fooled into thinking he was speaking on behalf of them. Strange how he seemed to attach himself to the couple though....
Yep, I think they used him once (maybe twice?) to read out a prepared statement and he's assumed his role since then. GloverMart said:
......
Re Charlie. One final thought - if as the parents have said all along that Charlie is stable, not getting any worse and has a chance of getting better, why has the "window of opportunity" gone? If he's no worse now than what he was a few weeks back, what's stopping them continuing? I am glad they have called a halt to all of this but saying that the opportunity has gone now seems to suggest they've accepted he's getting worse, surely?
This is more due to the potential hope given from the American specialist, there was a opportunity until he had sight of the medical notes and scan results, at which point the specialist knew his experimental treatment would not have any effect, therefore that opportunity has now gone.Re Charlie. One final thought - if as the parents have said all along that Charlie is stable, not getting any worse and has a chance of getting better, why has the "window of opportunity" gone? If he's no worse now than what he was a few weeks back, what's stopping them continuing? I am glad they have called a halt to all of this but saying that the opportunity has gone now seems to suggest they've accepted he's getting worse, surely?
The Sky twitter feed of the case is here - http://news.sky.com/story/live-judge-considers-cha... .
Making a few interesting points - the fact that the American doctor hadn't actually seen Charlie until last week, so any opinions on the viability of his treatment couldn't be considered until that point.
Also that the lawyers for the parents very generously donated their time as there's currently no provision for legal aid in this sort of case.
That Charlie wasn't a prisoner of the NHS - the opposite was the case, that GOSH had to apply to the court for any changes to his treatment.
Making a few interesting points - the fact that the American doctor hadn't actually seen Charlie until last week, so any opinions on the viability of his treatment couldn't be considered until that point.
Also that the lawyers for the parents very generously donated their time as there's currently no provision for legal aid in this sort of case.
That Charlie wasn't a prisoner of the NHS - the opposite was the case, that GOSH had to apply to the court for any changes to his treatment.
GloverMart said:
Re Charlie. One final thought - if as the parents have said all along that Charlie is stable, not getting any worse and has a chance of getting better, why has the "window of opportunity" gone? If he's no worse now than what he was a few weeks back, what's stopping them continuing? I am glad they have called a halt to all of this but saying that the opportunity has gone now seems to suggest they've accepted he's getting worse, surely?
According to the BBC the US doctor said that time had run out:BBC said:
... US neurologist Dr Michio Hirano had said he was no longer willing to offer the baby experimental therapy after he saw the results of a new MRI scan last week
I feel for the parents. From their reaction to these scans being shown in Court last week I suspect they too realised then.I feel so sorry for the parents, they seem to have been given false hope by the US Doctor
could the Barristers not have been paid with all the money the family have raised. I assume the NHS have paid for GOSH's barristers?
hope this is an end now, that the parents can enjoy some time with Charlie before he can slip away
have a feeling it may run and run though - really hope not
could the Barristers not have been paid with all the money the family have raised. I assume the NHS have paid for GOSH's barristers?
hope this is an end now, that the parents can enjoy some time with Charlie before he can slip away
have a feeling it may run and run though - really hope not
The hearing started just after lunch and the neurologist was the first in line to give testimony. The change in stance will be as a direct result of the testimony given. Only now the notes will have been reviewed, the US doctor will finally have seen the prognosis for effective treatment and it is more than likely that the parents' last hope was suddenly dashed.
Using phrases such as 'window of opportunity' is not helpful, it now gives the impression treatment was delayed - when in fact the whole delay was as a result of ongoing legal proceedings, and also that there was any chance whatsoever.
Glad to see the statement distancing themselves from the pseudo-official spokesperson. Hopefully he will be sued as the damage he has done is enormous.
Edited just to add my thoughts that the 'window of opportunity' statement will ensure this does rumble on and will sadly become a very polarised, political debate, almost certainly fuelled by ignorance and misinformation.
Using phrases such as 'window of opportunity' is not helpful, it now gives the impression treatment was delayed - when in fact the whole delay was as a result of ongoing legal proceedings, and also that there was any chance whatsoever.
Glad to see the statement distancing themselves from the pseudo-official spokesperson. Hopefully he will be sued as the damage he has done is enormous.
Edited just to add my thoughts that the 'window of opportunity' statement will ensure this does rumble on and will sadly become a very polarised, political debate, almost certainly fuelled by ignorance and misinformation.
Edited by Wiccan of Darkness on Monday 24th July 15:16
SydneyBridge said:
so if the doctor had reviewed the notes to start with, none of this would have happened?
It's unclear. What the judge appeared to say was that because the US doctor hadn't actually examined Charlie, his views on the success or otherwise of the treatment couldn't affect any judgements at that time. SydneyBridge said:
so if the doctor had reviewed the notes to start with, none of this would have happened?
I would read it more that had the doctor seen the patients notes before making claims about the potential success (or lack of) of his experimental treatment, GOSH would not have asked the courts to reopen the case.Sky News:
Charlie Gard's father says "had Charlie been given treatment sooner he would have had the potential to be a normal, healthy boy"
Mercy, I appreciate that the truth in this situation is a difficult thing to come to terms with, but still, he's not willing to accept it at all is he?
Charlie Gard's father says "had Charlie been given treatment sooner he would have had the potential to be a normal, healthy boy"
Mercy, I appreciate that the truth in this situation is a difficult thing to come to terms with, but still, he's not willing to accept it at all is he?
FN2TypeR said:
Sky News:
Charlie Gard's father says "had Charlie been given treatment sooner he would have had the potential to be a normal, healthy boy"
Mercy, I appreciate that the truth in this situation is a difficult thing to come to terms with, but still, he's not willing to accept it at all is he?
Wiccan - for goodness sake, can't you get hold of the father and explain it to him as well as you've done it for us on here?Charlie Gard's father says "had Charlie been given treatment sooner he would have had the potential to be a normal, healthy boy"
Mercy, I appreciate that the truth in this situation is a difficult thing to come to terms with, but still, he's not willing to accept it at all is he?
FN2TypeR said:
Sky News:
Charlie Gard's father says "had Charlie been given treatment sooner he would have had the potential to be a normal, healthy boy"
Mercy, I appreciate that the truth in this situation is a difficult thing to come to terms with, but still, he's not willing to accept it at all is he?
So are we going to see a Medical Negligence claim coming next....Charlie Gard's father says "had Charlie been given treatment sooner he would have had the potential to be a normal, healthy boy"
Mercy, I appreciate that the truth in this situation is a difficult thing to come to terms with, but still, he's not willing to accept it at all is he?
The Surveyor said:
FN2TypeR said:
Sky News:
Charlie Gard's father says "had Charlie been given treatment sooner he would have had the potential to be a normal, healthy boy"
Mercy, I appreciate that the truth in this situation is a difficult thing to come to terms with, but still, he's not willing to accept it at all is he?
So are we going to see a Medical Negligence claim coming next....Charlie Gard's father says "had Charlie been given treatment sooner he would have had the potential to be a normal, healthy boy"
Mercy, I appreciate that the truth in this situation is a difficult thing to come to terms with, but still, he's not willing to accept it at all is he?
FN2TypeR said:
The Surveyor said:
FN2TypeR said:
Sky News:
Charlie Gard's father says "had Charlie been given treatment sooner he would have had the potential to be a normal, healthy boy"
Mercy, I appreciate that the truth in this situation is a difficult thing to come to terms with, but still, he's not willing to accept it at all is he?
So are we going to see a Medical Negligence claim coming next....Charlie Gard's father says "had Charlie been given treatment sooner he would have had the potential to be a normal, healthy boy"
Mercy, I appreciate that the truth in this situation is a difficult thing to come to terms with, but still, he's not willing to accept it at all is he?
I cannot see how any Med Neg' claim could be made as a result of this
the child has not had his suffering prolonged
he was not mis-diagnosed
GOSH are not negligent in his treatment
the only argument would be that the treatment in America would have helped and given him a better quality of life and there is no evidence at all that it would have made the slightest bit of difference
if he had had gone to the USA and died on the way or before/during/after treatment - GOSH would have been blamed for letting him go- either way they could not win
the child has not had his suffering prolonged
he was not mis-diagnosed
GOSH are not negligent in his treatment
the only argument would be that the treatment in America would have helped and given him a better quality of life and there is no evidence at all that it would have made the slightest bit of difference
if he had had gone to the USA and died on the way or before/during/after treatment - GOSH would have been blamed for letting him go- either way they could not win
FN2TypeR said:
I would not be surprised in the slightest
Nor me.As a poster put up above this, can't Wiccy simply drop them a nice, concise and clear email as he did on here? Or do we think that would be listened to?? I imagine GOSH have some experience in explaining this sort of complicated stuff to grieving parents. I think the issue is more that the recipients of this knowledge and wisdom simply don't want to listen or being kind, are incapable of hearing what they don't want to hear?
The whole episode is awful and is a sad indictment of modern society and social media brewing up a s
t storm all of its own.On a completely different subject, the Mrs was once told by her 'Professor' that her major heart surgery could only be done one way and we were not to listen to anybody who claimed otherwise - all private care so we were slightly wary after hearing that. We were lucky in that the same professor then came back and said he had been wrong; he had found someone who convinced HIM that it could be done another way and he recommended the almost pioneering (but proven) procedure should proceed in the new way. That surgeon is now quite well known in that field globally! TRUST THE EXPERTS!!!!!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff