The (sometimes) American interpretation of ‘WOW what kind of TOTALITARIAN POLICE STATE won’t allow parents to take their child to whatever hospital they want?’ is a load of BS too. I am not entirely familiar with American law, but I’m pretty sure parents aren’t allowed to do whatever the fuck they want to their kids…

There isn’t a cure, and GOSH believes that taking Charlie anywhere else to be experimented on - because that is what is being proposed - is not in his best interests, and his parents shouldn’t be able to inflict that on him.

Somebody needs to start a bad cops registry.

There are three things that appear pretty clear motivations behind GOSH’s actions:

There is a significant chance that even the plane journey itself will involve significant extra discomfort for this poor child, to the point where that alone might kill him.

His life is basically pretty much an ongoing cycle of pain,…

Speaking of bad cops, the Detroit Free Press did a significant series starting today on how bad cops are rotated like pedophile priests.

But the parents are not the patient. Charlie is a separate person with his own rights (who cannot communicate his wishes), not the property of his parents. Your view only makes sense if we view Charlie as an extension of his parents or their property. He is neither. A decision must be made on his behalf, and in his…

I have a 25 weeker in the NICU. That is in no way like the case of this boy. Please do not make this comparison.

I am loathe to correct others, especially when it comes to subtle and subjective aesthetic perceptions, but the hair color of the model in the lead photo is in fact Tuna Sashimi (and not Salmon Sushi).

Advertising potentially dangerous drugs directly to the public is... scary to me.

Presently there is no treatment. Cost is not the problem.

It’s not about the money. It’s about the fact the kid is likely brain dead, possibly suffering, has no hope of functional improvement and the treatments the parents are going for won’t work. The court is focusing on the paitent - in this case, the baby - and it’s needs to not be stuck suffering any longer than needed.

And, of course, the American system has ‘death panels’ too, except they’re run by insurance companies instead of the court system. Because, somebody trying to turn a profit off of suffering is a great judge of what medical needs someone might need.

For those wanting to read the facts about this case, here is the place to start:

The procedure would give him some more months at best. There is no way to reverse or halt his condition, it would only slow it down.

Agree in general, but most parents do not do what these parents are doing.

BINGO!! It’s Terri Schiavo all over again. Except for the British part.

So, what’s the purpose of the treatment they want to get? Is it intended to just prevent his condition from getting any worse? I understand that of course the parents want to do something, and I can’t imagine being in their position, but even if the treatment were to work, against hugely impossible odds, their poor…

Horrific situation, but the general mainstream UK opinion is: most parents would do what these parents are doing, but that’s why courts exist: to make sure the core concern is the interest of the child and the vast weight of medical evidence, and not overwhelmed by (natural but illogical) desperation.

So—what am I missing here? Basically, are Reps Wenstrup and Franks arguing that we should bring this baby to the US, make him a citizen, and then perform medical experiments that will not improve his quality of life? Doesn’t seem christian to me, somehow.

Ugh. This story is incredibly heartbreaking. I get losing a child is hard, but this child is kind of suffering, and that’s not cool at all. :\