Should the Government or the Patient Decide What is Medically Necessary

  • Thread starter Thread starter HolySpirit
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not passing judgment on your soul Pup7. There is still time for you to put God’s role and purpose for the family above a public entity.

Its pride, elitism, and fear of being wrong that kept Alfie contained at Alder Hey. If he died in flight the hospital would not be liable if the parents knew the risk. They were afraid he would escape alive and prove them wrong. Shameful.
 
You are passing judgment. And I resent it, to be honest.

That is not your place. Please refrain from doing so.

The distrust you have displayed for those of us in the profession is nothing short of astounding.

And your conclusions are poorly drawn and flagrantly incorrect.
 
Last edited:
If you feel that way I’m sorry.

Keep in mind we have doctors who think they are being ESPECIALLY compassionate by killing disabled babies…let alone healthy ones who might be poor or abused.
 
I have to agree. it is quite easy to sit at the computer and issue judgments in anonymity about a multitude of things we know very little about.
 
This forum is supposed to be “self policing”. You owe an apology for insinuating that @Pup7 is anything other than a compassionate, Catholic professional.
 
Doctors are not always ethical. We have a society now where DOCTORS routinely kill human beings born or unborn in the name of “compassion”. We have doctors who put aborted human parts in rats(making chimeras) for research in the name of compassion. It is not shameful to question why any doctor should make a life or death decision against the wishes of the family in the name of compassion. I will always be on the side of life and God’s purpose and role for a loving family.
 
I am sorry if her perception was I was judging her immortal soul, but I was not.
 
Doctors are always willing to collaborate with doctors from other hospitals. If a sensible plan for further treatment had been the table it would have been considered. Alder Hey did not refuse to release him out of pride but out of concern for him.
 
I don’t understand that reasoning. Ensure his death vs. him potentially dying?
 
Prevent him from suffering an uncontrolled death in transit just to please his parents.
 
Monica83 said:
. It is not shameful to question why any doctor should make a life or death decision against the wishes of the family in the name of compassion. I will always be on the side of life and God’s purpose and role for a loving family.
Click to expand...
You are hastily back-pedalling now.

May I remind you that what you said in post 162 was . ‘They were afraid he would escape alive and prove them wrong’.

Do you wish to retract that accusation now? I really think you should.
 
Uncontrolled? Hes was probably on fentanyl or the like since being admitted. He was not in pain.
 
I’m not an expert but I would imagine It’s easier to manage a patients health needs in hospital than in transit.
 
Monica83 said:
Uncontrolled? Hes was probably on fentanyl or the like since being admitted. He was not in pain.
Click to expand...
And you were privileged to see his charts, were you? When was this then?

And remind me, what are your medical qualifications exactly?
 
Oh I see…well because the doctors said so. Might as well give the terminal baby in the womb a digoxin shot too eh? More compassionate?
 
I’ve provided medications(narcotics included) to patients for about 10 years now. I was in the Army as a medic and occupational therapy assistant.
 
They can make a prognosis, but having informed the parents to prevent possible liability, and as long as pain is controlled, the parents should have a choice in healthcare.

A “terminal” unborn baby should not be forcibly aborted in the name of compassion. Neither should the parental rights of a “terminal” born baby be stripped in the name of compassion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top