Charlie Gard

[pesky1972 5,222]

Francie, I'll not get into all the petty name calling, I'll leave that to you. Maybe it makes you feel like a big man.., whatever.

I think your analogy with the disabled folks on your course is absolutely meaningless. What Charlie Gard has is a degenerative conditon which sadly IS going to kill him. That's not my opinion but that of the medical professionals that have been treating him. They simply don't want him to suffer any more and don't believe the treatment being discussed achieves anything, other than to prolong his suffering and inevitable death.

His poor parents disagree but are clutching at straws imo.., although I'd probably do exactly the same in their position. In truth they need a miracle, but unfortunately miracles don't exist.

Edited July 14, 2017 by pesky1972

[j j m 6,539]

its a thing no parent would want to do,but you have to think of the lads quality of life

[pesky1972 5,222]

Francie, I reckon that your religious beliefs mean that you believe the sanctity of life goes before all else. Your opinion is shared by many, but in my opinion shouldn't influence the life or death of another human being that doesn't hold that belief, or who hasn't even lived long enough to form an opinion.

Question for you; (bit of a digression), would you condone abortion under any circumstances?

[sandymere 8,263]

‘ON CHILDREN’ BY KHALIL GIBRAN

Your children are not your children.

They are the sons and daughters of Life’s longing for itself.

They come through you but not from you,

And though they are with you yet they belong not to you.

You may give them your love but not your thoughts,

For they have their own thoughts.

You may house their bodies but not their souls,

For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow,

which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams.

You may strive to be like them,

but seek not to make them like you.

For life goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday.

You are the bows from which your children

as living arrows are sent forth.

The archer sees the mark upon the path of the infinite,

and He bends you with His might

that His arrows may go swift and far.

Let your bending in the archer’s hand be for gladness;

For even as He loves the arrow that flies,

so He loves also the bow that is stable.

[sandymere 8,263]

Alas there are many who would pray on the desperate, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2017/05/04/its-full-steam-ahead-for-cancer-quack-stanislaw-burzynski/ and it is the children that suffer.

[Francie 6,368]

Francie, I reckon that your religious beliefs mean that you believe the sanctity of life goes before all else. Your opinion is shared by many, but in my opinion shouldn't influence the life or death of another human being that doesn't hold that belief, or who hasn't even lived long enough to form an opinion.

Question for you; (bit of a digression), would you condone abortion under any circumstances?

I apolagise for the name calling, your comment just seemed so lifeless an pointless, put yourself in the parents shoes, the little kid is still here fighting for a chance at life, your not gone until your gone theres always hope.

 

One example look at stephen hawking, he still managing with his illness, everyone deserves the right to live an fight for it, no matter how slim the odds are.

 

I was born thre months premature, weighed a bag of sugar, thought there was no hope for me, here i am today still marching on.

 

And no i dont agree with abortion full stop, no sense murdering a innocent defenceless baby when theres other options, like give baby up for adoption an kill the rapist an throw him to the dogs.

 

You might not agree but thats my opinion, right or wrong it maybe.

[Francie 6,368]

ON CHILDREN BY KHALIL GIBRAN

 

Your children are not your children.

They are the sons and daughters of Lifes longing for itself.

They come through you but not from you,

And though they are with you yet they belong not to you.

You may give them your love but not your thoughts,

For they have their own thoughts.

You may house their bodies but not their souls,

For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow,

which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams.

You may strive to be like them,

but seek not to make them like you.

For life goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday.

You are the bows from which your children

as living arrows are sent forth.

The archer sees the mark upon the path of the infinite,

and He bends you with His might

that His arrows may go swift and far.

Let your bending in the archers hand be for gladness;

For even as He loves the arrow that flies,

so He loves also the bow that is stable.

What is this suppose to mean sandy?

[jacknife 2,005]

I've always been of the opinion that severely brain damaged children should be allowed to die

 

Only yesterday I was working in a house where 2 severely disabled adults live.... It's one of those houses where they have live in 24 hour care

 

Both of them in their 30s and just lying on the floor howling.... Absolute nothing there unable to do anything

 

Carer said it's very rare the parents visit

[bird 9,872]

I've always been of the opinion that severely brain damaged children should be allowed to die

 

Only yesterday I was working in a house where 2 severely disabled adults live.... It's one of those houses where they have live in 24 hour care

 

Both of them in their 30s and just lying on the floor howling.... Absolute nothing there unable to do anything

 

Carer said it's very rare the parents visit

and that another good point to make , its not to bad with a little baby , but that baby could go on to live like above for 30-50 years , would the parents of charlie be so keen to keep him alive in that state, for that amount of time, as you say some parents cant handle it so dont visit them .

[jacknife 2,005]

That's what the carerers say.. Parents expect a baby to screem fill its nappy etc

 

But teens to adult its not the same and many can't cope

[pesky1972 5,222]

Francie, apology both appreciated & accepted.

 

Thankfully cases where the doctors and patients disagree are rare. And I'm certain that both want to do right by the boy, as I posted earlier in the thread I'd lean toward the medical professionals knowing what's best, that's it. If you read my first post you'll see I'm dubious at best regards the treatment the parents have been offered.

 

Regards the whole right to life thing. I think I remember a discussion with you before on this and your own mum's brave battle with illness.

The issue I have is that modern medicine effectively plays God every day by artificially extending life, but where sometimes, especially where the person has no power of consent, I think that it's morally wrong. The right to live is much more to me than still having a pulse.

 

You say no abortion ever? Question for you: how could you NOT condone aborting a foetus if it was discovered that, with say a very high degree of certainty, the infant would be born damaged to such an extent that their quality of life would always be minimal. i.e. they would never walk, talk, make decisions for themselves, know what it feels like to be totally in love with someone and have them love you back the same, hunt, fish, stand on top of a mountain and gaze down on all the beautiful things in nature..., all that life is about. To me, allowing a person to be born into what might be a living hell & not terminating is tantamount to cruelty.

Edited July 15, 2017 by pesky1972

[bird 9,872]

Francie, apology both appreciated & accepted.

 

Thankfully cases where the doctors and patients disagree are rare. And I'm certain that both want to do right by the boy, as I posted earlier in the thread I'd lean toward the medical professionals knowing what's best, that's it. If you read my first post you'll see I'm dubious at best regards the treatment the parents have been offered.

 

Regards the whole right to life thing. I think I remember a discussion with you before on this and your own mum's brave battle with illness.

The issue I have is that modern medicine effectively plays God every day by artificially extending life, but where sometimes, especially where the person has no power of consent, I think that it's morally wrong. The right to live is much more to me than still having a pulse.

 

You say no abortion ever? Question for you: how could you NOT condone aborting a foetus if it was discovered that, with say a very high degree of certainty, the infant would be born damaged to such an extent that their quality of life would always be minimal. i.e. they would never walk, talk, make decisions for themselves, know what it feels like to be in totally in love with someone and have them love you back the same, hunt, fish, stand on top of a mountain and gaze down on all the all the beautiful things in nature..., all that life is about. To me, allowing a person to be born into what might be a living hell & not terminating is tantamount to cruelty.

sent a pm .?

[sandymere 8,263]

 

ON CHILDREN BY KHALIL GIBRAN

 

Your children are not your children.

They are the sons and daughters of Lifes longing for itself.

They come through you but not from you,

And though they are with you yet they belong not to you.

You may give them your love but not your thoughts,

For they have their own thoughts.

You may house their bodies but not their souls,

For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow,

which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams.

You may strive to be like them,

but seek not to make them like you.

For life goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday.

You are the bows from which your children

as living arrows are sent forth.

The archer sees the mark upon the path of the infinite,

and He bends you with His might

that His arrows may go swift and far.

Let your bending in the archers hand be for gladness;

For even as He loves the arrow that flies,

so He loves also the bow that is stable.

What is this suppose to mean sandy?

 

We do not own our children, we give them life but do not own that life.

 

 

In relation to the case in question what feels right for the parents may not be what is actually right for the child.

an example https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/apr/13/followers-of-christ-idaho-religious-sect-child-mortality-refusing-medical-help

Edited July 14, 2017 by sandymere

[Francie 6,368]

Francie, apology both appreciated & accepted.

 

Thankfully cases where the doctors and patients disagree are rare. And I'm certain that both want to do right by the boy, as I posted earlier in the thread I'd lean toward the medical professionals knowing what's best, that's it. If you read my first post you'll see I'm dubious at best regards the treatment the parents have been offered.

 

Regards the whole right to life thing. I think I remember a discussion with you before on this and your own mum's brave battle with illness.

The issue I have is that modern medicine effectively plays God every day by artificially extending life, but where sometimes, especially where the person has no power of consent, I think that it's morally wrong. The right to live is much more to me than still having a pulse.

 

You say no abortion ever? Question for you: how could you NOT condone aborting a foetus if it was discovered that, with say a very high degree of certainty, the infant would be born damaged to such an extent that their quality of life would always be minimal. i.e. they would never walk, talk, make decisions for themselves, know what it feels like to be in totally in love with someone and have them love you back the same, hunt, fish, stand on top of a mountain and gaze down on all the all the beautiful things in nature..., all that life is about. To me, allowing a person to be born into what might be a living hell & not terminating is tantamount to cruelty.

No problem mate, i know of a family who were told similar, yer baby gona be this that an the other, wont walk talk, all the rest, an the baby came out healthy as f**k, so docs are not always right, an plus im not going to play God by terminating a baby in that situation, i think no matter what if the parents want to keep then thats all good, its there baby an there blood so its there decison to go ahead with the birth.

[Francie 6,368]

 

 

 

ON CHILDREN BY KHALIL GIBRAN

 

Your children are not your children.

They are the sons and daughters of Lifes longing for itself.

They come through you but not from you,

And though they are with you yet they belong not to you.

You may give them your love but not your thoughts,

For they have their own thoughts.

You may house their bodies but not their souls,

For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow,

which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams.

You may strive to be like them,

but seek not to make them like you.

For life goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday.

You are the bows from which your children

as living arrows are sent forth.

The archer sees the mark upon the path of the infinite,

and He bends you with His might

that His arrows may go swift and far.

Let your bending in the archers hand be for gladness;

For even as He loves the arrow that flies,

so He loves also the bow that is stable.

What is this suppose to mean sandy?

We do not own our children, we give them life but do not own that life.

 

 

In relation to the case in question what feels right for the parents may not be what is actually right for the child.

an example https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/apr/13/followers-of-christ-idaho-religious-sect-child-mortality-refusing-medical-help

Pardon me but i thought that were responsible for our children until they turn eighteen or whatever, that quote is just hardcore atheism, pure bullshit.

 

Of course your child is yours ffs sandy cmon that quote is cold an chilling.