UK court rules to kill baby against loaded parents' wishes

>couple has baby that develops a serious health condition 8 weeks after birth
>experts say it's no use, there's no cure
>american doctor offers and experimental treatment
>they managed to raise £1.4million via crowdfunding
>courts don't allow the parents to move the son to america for the experimental treatment
>couple managed to get 110,000+ signatures calling for the Prime Minister to release the baby from the hospital
>they try to battle the doctors in the court who want to pull the plug of the baby so bad
>UK judicial system ultimately forbids them from seeking experimental treatment in the US with their own money
>European Union courts are in total agreement with killing the baby

The Orwellian world we're living in, where parents need to fight just so they can treat their child with their own money. If you want to off your kids it's alright, if you want to spend money to treat one you're almost a criminal.

Other urls found in this thread:

thesun.co.uk/living/3318065/arthur-olga-estopinan-arturito-charlie-gard-court-case/
bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-38650739
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

This is basically a revenge killing, as in their minds if the poor cannot get the healthcare someone else could afford, then nobody should get it. Also, if this baby had immigrant parents, the NHS would be stumbling over one another to shower the kid with money.

It's cold blooded murder. Plain and simple.

THERE ARE NO DEATH PANELS! THERE ARE NONE! AND BY NONE WE MEAN THAT THERE ARE A REASONABLE AMOUNT!
I wonder exactly how many of these highly diseased and thoroughly unvaccinated "refugees" are subjected to the same reasoning.

This is also useful in pointing out that the globalists and the one percent are not just anyone with money.

The whole situation is fucked. That said that American doctor was basically scamming there is nothing in the world that can save that baby. Plus no ethics committee would approve experimental treatment on a baby that probably so damaged it will be dependent on expensive care its whole life and never be a fully functional adult.

You want to save ONE white baby? GOY NO!!!

Like fat people? Like down people? Like whatever disease that requires lots of money for life?

>preventing parents from paying out of pocket to save their child
how is this anyone's business?
>meanwhile governments fund abortion clinics
shiggydiggy coo-coo-cuck-land

If the kid and parents were fucking mudslimes, these fuckers would be falling over themselves to get it to the US.

Fucking disgusting.

This is one of the most horrific stories of the overstepping of government power I have ever encountered.

No the government's stopping you lot from taking £1 million from them on the basis of false hope.

The child is clinically brain dead.

all niggers are born brain dead yet they attend Harvard with full scholarship

Jesus Christ save me, but I'm raging pretty hard over this.

>from them
>not from circulation
If you think 1 million is a lot to be removed from the economy, you're either retarded or expect the brexit to leave UK in Venezuela tier ruin.

It's THEIR money and more importantly its THEIR FUCKING CHILD you fucking piece of shit bong this is NOT THE GOVERNMENT'S PLACE.

This is where you take the child regardless of what anyone says. Your child, your money.

That's because America is a cucked nation.

The tax payer shouldn't have to pay for 40 years of round the clock treatment on top of lining money grubbing American doctors pockets for an unproven treatment that won't reverse the severe brain damage the child already has.

I didn't say it had anything to do with removing it from the economy, they're being scammed, the treatment can't reverse brain damage, even after treatment he will need 24 hour care and won't be able to breathe or eat without a machine. They're praying on their desperation and the Americans would happily take the million and let the NHS and British tax payer pay millions every year for a vegetable.

Better they spent their money on the next healthy child.

"UK court rules that child abuse is illegal" would be a more accurate headline.

Nobody is killing the baby. They're not putting a gun to its head. They're switching off life support. The baby dies on its own.

>but that's the equivalent of killing
Artificially prolonging life with no prognosis except further suffering is the equivalent of child abuse, too.

People with subtly mutated genetics like that guy pictured always end up with underweight babies, malformed babies, diseased babies or miscarriages. Further strengthening the case for eugenics.

I work with a total white trash family of the laziest pieces of crap ever, who get dumber each generation.

The 16 year old is pregnant, and just found out the baby she is carrying is way too small.

She's probably going to have a miscarriage.

Sometime I just stare at her malformed cranial structure and total idiot bug eyed face and just know that her baby must end up coming out malformd and shitty like her.

And low and behold, it's too small & underweight for it's stage of development in the womb.

Is it a coincidence that the shittiest people tend to also be of the shittiest genetics?

NO.

This featured couples baby was highly prone to coming out messed up, and it's their fault for having attempted child birth to begin with.

The baby can't be moved without life support are you retarded.

Also even if they get the treatment and it's successful, the baby's still going to end up a retard like this kid who got the treatment and survived.

thesun.co.uk/living/3318065/arthur-olga-estopinan-arturito-charlie-gard-court-case/

>That said that American doctor was basically scamming there is nothing in the world that can save that baby.
Pretty much this. Probably a Jew doctor that has an 'experimental' procedure that has a 'chance' of working.
>Sorry Goy the procedure didn't work, that will be $1.5 million dollars.

>nothing is killing the baby
except the government and the doctors who want to pull the plug :^)

Exactly, it actually makes me worried that there are Yanks in here defending doctors who are effectively robbing people at their weakest moment.

>let the NHS and British tax payer pay millions every year for a vegetable
Like all your other obese and retarded people that benefit from it, right?

>they're being scammed
Since when is the state allowed to decide what you should or shouldn't choose to do with your own money? I can see this only leading to more infringement of civil liberties.

>That's because America is a cucked nation.
not as cucked as your shithole
>The tax payer shouldn't have to pay for 40 years of round the clock treatment on top of lining money grubbing American doctors pockets for an unproven treatment that won't reverse the severe brain damage the child already has.
do you understand the fallacy behind that argument? your tax dollars are given to 'asylum' seekers who are not citizens while your citizens suffer and work to pay the ((('asylum'))) seekers to blow your country up? who is really cucked? at least we have guns...

I'm not arguing that it's a good decision to destroy your life over a brain dead child, but it should be the parent's decision to make, the court has no role here.

Portable life support can be purchased if you have 1.4 million pounds lying around

>THEIR money
Well nobody is preventing them from throwing this money on a child or buying equipment with it. Otherwise it's the governments equipment, and they can refuse to waste it on a child who is literally brain dead.I definitely wouldn't prolong a person's suffering for a million dollars.

>except the government and the doctors who want to pull the plug :^)
If the babby can't live on its own then that's the babby's problem.

are you a medical professional?

are you a clinical research of some sort in this field?

Most of the people in this thread defending this are Brits. You are truly lost.

>but it should be the parent's decision to make
"I'm not saying it's a good idea to beat your child rape him daily for eight years, starve him and neglect him in the basement, and then flay him alive for a YouTube video, but it should be the parent's decision to make."
Child abuse is illegal even if you're the parent of the child that you're abusing.

the baby can live with the parents' money, who are you or the UK courts to prevent them from giving their son a treatment they see as better than the one given by the NHS?

It's not like they want the government to keep paying for it, they want out of the system but now their son is the government's property or so.

totally the same thing. good argument.

also listen up all you bootlicking cucks. these life support machines, these medicines, these treatments: are super inflated to the point where only governments and corporations have the rights to the incentives. the jews are over 60000000000% behind this. they want you to be dumb-down and sick and poor. it is a big game. reason there is no competition is because they do not allow it.

>the baby can live with the parents' money
No it can't, obviously, or the parents would just buy their own life support systems.

When you say "the baby can live with the parents' money" what you really mean is the parents, through begging and panhandling, have scraped together enough to pay some Jew liar doctor from the US to wave a magic wand, collect his paycheck, and then express regret that the "experimental" treatment didn't work - all the while the babby is sitting in a UK hospital on UK machines sucking up UK resources from kids who can actually be helped.

Not to mention that child abuse doesn't become legal just because you're the parent of the child you're abusing.

>inflicting pointless suffering
>not child abuse
Although you're right in a sense because this is more akin to animal cruelty considering how retarded the babby is.

>Plus no ethics committee would approve experimental treatment on a baby that probably so damaged it will be dependent on expensive care its whole life and never be a fully functional adult

Better dead than alive with an expensive medical condition amirite people who's with me on this

Nice strawman argument, we're not talking about retards, shitskins or fat people.

This kid is going to die without treatment, with treatment he will live as a vegetable, better he were to just die than be locked in a corpse for 30 years. Retards don't need 24 hour care, £1 million operation and millions more spending on equipment so he can live at home.

The state normally wouldn't step in but these people are being prayed on by your doctors, they will take the money and the child will die anyway.

> Muh guns

Fucking kek, what does this even have to do with this discussion?

No but I've done more than anyone else in this thread by following this story for a month and reading the full report by the appeals court.

there is no strawman. this kid has the right to live. end of jewry right there. if you cucks can pay for fats and down syndrome retards, niggers, you can spare a few million. fucking joke.

Take a second to comprehend your statement here.
Do you see the contradiction? Probably not.

>better he were to just die than be locked in a corpse for 30 years.

why

you can't mechanically get any worse off than dead so if your family has a bank account and a will who the fuck is anyone to murder that person

>Sup Forums has threads all the time laughing at brain-dead kids (especially that one YT channel with the twins the parents dress up)
>pic-related happens and suddenly Sup Forums has a heart for the clinically brain dead

we get it, you're a supreme edgelord who doesn't value human life. now fuck off

Remember white man: This is what your fathers fought and died for

Nice strawman, faggot.

If that's true then why do people commit suicide?

I think most people would rather be dead than in a 'Johnny god his gun' scenario'.

>No it can't, obviously, or the parents would just buy their own life support systems.
They want and have enough money to pay for an ambulance airplane to get to the US to get whatever treatment they want to give to their kid. The UK government/NHS isn't necessary any longer. It doesn't matter how they got the money, they got enough to treat their kid.

>trying an alternative treatment for your kid is child abuse
You do realize that doctors aren't gods, right? They do mistakes when condemning people to live X months, get diagnosis wrong and more.

I get the impression you want to live under a scientific dictatorship where a group of anointed docs tell you to off your mom and you gladly do it, for the well being of Big Brother. There's a thing called second opinion, and people get second opinions in the medical field all the time. That's essentially what they're doing.

It's not the government's money bong.

Horrible analogy. Human life should be valued, and attempting to treat a suffering human life is not a bad goal, rather than just ending it. I'm sure the legal battle has prolonged and caused more suffering than just allowing the parents to try.

All I read in that article was
>31 year old woman has baby

Well theres your problem.

Are you stupid? No one actually gives a shit about a vegetable child. Millions of people die every day and the majority of us are blissfully unaware. That's not the point. The point is, the government is overstepping their bounds by legally restricting travel on it's own law abiding, tax paying citizens.

>Better dead than alive with an expensive medical condition amirite people who's with me on this
precisely, from now on all white british born children shall be left in the woods soon after they are born. if they cant fend for themselves, so be it.

>every person has an unlimited right to every possible effort that could be made to save its life
Fuck off communist.

It's not a strawman though. The logic is exactly the same.

Being the parent of a child doesn't give you any special right whatsoever to engage in child abuse. An "experimental" treatment that will render this child a vegetable is child abuse.

It's sick but we shouldn't be surprised as it's what happens when you have a culture of death.

It is, the money they have will only cover the immediate treatment.

The decades of care he would need here (which would be 10 million plus easily over 30 years) would be funded by the NHS and the tax payer, of course these money grubbing doctors don't have to worry about that though because they can cut and run.

Death Panels don't exi-

You missed the part where the US doctor didnt realise how severe the illness was and said treatment was unlikely to be effective.

>I think most people would rather be dead

that's because you're dumb as shit

if you still experience any sensation even of thought that's probably more freedom and richness of life than an inert hydrocarbon mass

The fact is that no matter how much you hate Obese people or shitskins they pay tax like everyone else and can actually breathe and eat without a £1 million machine.

If that was a Muslim or nigger baby the UK would allow the experimental treatment and also pay for it.

>letting the kid die is wrong
>letting the kid go under treatment is wrong
>letting the parents decide what to is child abuse
>letting the parents pay is wrong
>letting the state pay is wrong
it is a paradox, contraction, fallacy, straw-man, jewry all in one.

M8 this panel is B8, they didn't even add the report that said he was brain dead.

It's salty obese septics projecting their insecurities as always.

>They want and have enough money to pay for an ambulance airplane to get to the US to get whatever treatment they want to give to their kid.
And what happens when the treatment doesn't work and they fly home? How many weeks or months will it take for them to arrange their visas and flights? How many millions has this potato swallowed already in hospital bills and legal fees?

>It doesn't matter how they got the money
Every dollar spent on and donated to this lost cause is wasted.

>They do mistakes when condemning people to live X months, get diagnosis wrong and more.
A cancer prognosis is a lot different from "your brain is fucking 80% dead."

>I get the impression you want to live under a scientific dictatorship where a group of anointed docs tell you to off your mom and you gladly do it, for the well being of Big Brother
Then you're wrong, and you should try assuming less in future, retard.

>Human life should be valued
Nothing has infinite value.

31 is a perfectly fine age to have a baby. Past 35 is when you need to worry.

This. We are arguing for civil liberties, and expressly medical parental rights for a child, not because we believe Dr. Shekelstein can actually cure the kid, but that parents should have more decision making power than the government. If one disagrees then I surely hope that one day government overreach doesn't prevent you from treating one of your loved ones

Well that's more than he would have, he would be a vegetable, unable to talk, breathe, eat or even understand what was going on around him.

Keeping him alive serves no purpose.

>>letting the kid die is wrong
Incorrect.

Letting the kid die is right in all the circumstances.

We turn off life support for braindead old people every single fucking day, yet you ignorant faggots throw a pissfit when we do the exact same thing for a baby because REEE CHILDREN ARE SACRED.

No, they're not. They're meat like everything else.

Well this is the price of a tax funded healthcare system, it has to be utilitarian.

Maybe instead of worry about this one instance you should worry about the millions of Americans who die from treatable diseases because they can't afford health insurance.

>treating
I'm sorry, what treatment are you suggesting this child receive? The one that even the doctor who proposed it says isn't going to work, and that will never restore the massive amount of brain functionality already lost anyway?

That "treatment"?

You're basically saying we shouldn't switch off life support on alzhiemers patients because we haven't tried leeching them yet and it might help.

>Plus no ethics committee would approve experimental treatment on a baby that probably so damaged it will be dependent on expensive care its whole life and never be a fully functional adult.
Yet your government fully supports giving expensive care to fully functional jihadists.

Its the parents' right to do that though.
If later on they're like "yeah this wasn't worth it, the treatment didn't help him live very well" then that's their own fucking problem.
A government can advise people but cannot prevent them from using their own money to pursue their own happiness when it doesn't infringe upon the rights of others (and in this case is trying to save the right to life of the child).
And maybe allowing the procedure would have uncovered some new flaw or shown how to improve the treatment or study of this particular disease.

>It's not a strawman though
Yes it is.
>The logic is exactly the same.
No it isn't, you fucking piece of shit.
Keeping your child on life support is not the same as raping them in a dungeon. You're either literally retarded, or a Shareblue/CTR paid shill.

>Keeping him alive serves no purpose.

4u

nobody cares about your gay opinions when it comes to imprisoning a baby in a hospital until it dies against the parents' wishes

They probably want to avoid this happening again

bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-38650739

>or a Shareblue/CTR paid shill.

it is this one my man

I have solved this mystery, bow to my intellect

>Keeping your child on life support is not the same as raping them in a dungeon
The only possible difference you can name is the magnitude of suffering.

And that's the point.

Keeping this child on life support is still inflicting suffering on it for no fucking reason whatsoever, and thus is still child abuse.

Wow, fuck Europe.

>defends eugenics
>thinks the parents should be cucks to the government in what's best for the child
>is ok with the government holding the baby hostage in the NHS hospital while the parents have £1.4m in the bank for treating him elsewhere
>calls others communists
jej

>And what happens when the treatment doesn't work and they fly home?
How is that any of your business of the government's? Don't you want the baby dead? Fine, you and NHS have quit but the parents want to try to give the baby some quality of life. Perhaps they'll even be able to help others by investing into possible treatments for this whole shit.

>wasted
It was donated out of people's goodwill all over the world, again their money is none of your business as well.

Doctors give ultimatums all the time that prove to be wrong. The parents have a right to get a second opinion. But you sure love to get on your knees and suck some authority cock don't you.

>World's most expensive vegetable

The rights of these parents have to be weighed up against the rights of everyone else on the NHS, the £10 million they spend keeping a vegetable alive could fund thousands of treatments of chemotherapy.

Them pursing their happiness does infringe on other peoples rights, THEIR MONEY WILL ONLY COVER THE FIRST TREATMEN.

I'm sure people who have to wait months for cancer care can be glad that this child lived on in a bed ridden coma.

No it would literally serve no purpose for anyone.

It's not about the treatment. If I wanted to empty out my bank account, buy nothing but I've cubes and watch them melt. There is not a person in the world who should be able to tell me what I do with my money. Time is money, and you're wasting yours on this website. Who are you to tell anyone else how they waste theirs?

>The only possible difference you can name is the magnitude of suffering.

>The only possible difference you can name

>only possible difference

They should take the baby to the US against the court order.

>literally supports the state wasting infinite dollars in some retarded pursuit of egalitarian "everyone's life matters" progressive bullshit, which will undoubtedly be funded by increasing taxes
>not communist

>How is that any of your business of the government's
Government has the sovereign right to legislate and thus can make whatever it wants its business, retard.

Not to mention that it's still child abuse.

>the parents want to try to give the baby some quality of life
Their opinions are of no higher relevance than anybody else's in this matter.

They can if they want.

The judgement basically says 'we won't support him through the NHS', so when he returned they would have to find millions of Pounds every year to keep treating him.

>trip

buddy are you lost

>Who are you to tell anyone else how they waste theirs?
I want to buy a nigger and flay him alive for amusement in my amphitheatre. I'll sell tickets.
>"murder is illegal"
REEEE WHO ARE YOU TO TELL ME HOW TO SPEND MY MONEY.

>"but that's a strawman because there parents aren't breaking the law!"
Firstly, they're in violation of a court order, so yes they are. Secondly, they'd be committing child abuse if they actually went through with it.

Yes, and that difference is irrelevant, thus it doesn't matter if you name it.

No. You can't play that card. This child was born a vegetable. By natural selection, he is defect. In people with cancer, their cells develope a mutation that kills them. That's a defect, and should be treated as such. If you're going scream "SOCIAL MEDICINE FOR ALL" that means you don't get to pick and choose who you treat. That defeats the point of "social"

I don't worry bong. I can and do afford health insurance for myself and my family. It's not an issue of taxpayer money if I want to treat my own, regardless of cost. It's one of those great things about being a burger. That's the society I live in, and the one I prefer. My liberty with health is more important than those who don't work and make enough for themselves or their families.

You're missing the point entirely. It has nothing to do with the treatment, and everything to do about the rights of the parent, not the state, to decide. And yes, if I had millions and had uncle Alzheimer on life support and wanted to keep him on life support because I'm hopefully of a treatment, then I should be allowed to spend my money and do so (given uncle Al hasn't expressed that he wishes not to be placed on life support given the situation)

Meanwhile some nigger kid is born with a cleft lip and gets flown to America with his family for surgery, will probably get to stay in America on bennies for the rest of his life.

BUT OH NO, WE CANNOT LET THE WHITE FAMILY IN WHO CAN FUND MOST OF THE MONEY THEMSELVES.

>taking money from them on the basis of false hope

By that logic, we should just euthanize anyone diagnosised with cancers that have low survival rates immediately.

Also, it's their money and their child, not the government's.

>If that was a Muslim or nigger baby the UK would allow the experimental treatment and also pay for it

True. The parents should say tell the media that their baby self identifies as black and murdering him is racism. Checkmate.

>state wasting infinite dollars
>parents got over a million and want out of the NHS system
Seems pretty clear to me they wouldn't want to put the baby in the same kind of healthcare system, especially after they were told he's expendable and from now on it's pull your plug all day everyday.

>child abuse
Nah it isn't. You're a fucking retard who equates keeping someone on life support to raping someone daily. Go put your dick through a meat grinder.

>if I had millions and had uncle Alzheimer on life support and wanted to keep him on life support because I'm hopefully of a treatment, then I should be allowed to spend my money and do so
But it's not just life support, is it. It's subjecting uncle Al to a cruel and torturous procedure with no prospect of success simply because you're a weak fuck who can't let go.

THAT is the point. If potatolad could be sent home and remain in potatuity then he would be. Many britatos exist in Britain as it is. The crucial defining factor is that he can't be sent home, he won't recover without treatment, and the treatment doesn't work and will just cause more suffering.

This isn't "executing a retarded baby."

This is turning off life support for someone we literally can no longer help.

>but this treatment might work
According to his doctor that's as likely as amputating his hands and grafting his ass skin over his eyes working. Should we let the parents do that too?

Are you comparing to buying an able bodied person, whom is being held against their will; to a retarded vegetable that can't even function? Hold on friend, you've moved the goal posts to far you're playing a different sport. Slavery deprives a person of their freedom, and killing this child deprives a person of their life. Those are guaranteed under our constitution, that's why America is great. You're not against the constitution are you user? You're not a left leaning commie right? Ever person has unaliable rights as given to us by birth, that's the definition of "unaliable".

this is a staged event to "restrict" or otherwise control things like this from happening in the future. its a "tactic".
>raises money. like 1.4 million
>cant do shit
>why raise the money to begin with without a garantee that it will be used for said usage. (oh right, i suppose if something goes wrong then it can be for the heartache they experience)
>be an media spectacle
>still cant do shit

honestly kill that fuck, should have been healthy, and shouldnt have raised money. other kids have problems, did they get money raised? they probably could have actually used it if they did. sick of this article and these teary parents

>>Keeping your child on life support is not the same as raping them in a dungeon
>The only possible difference you can name is the magnitude of suffering.


>The only possible difference you can name is the magnitude of suffering.

>The only possible difference you can name

>only possible difference

>You're a fucking retard who equates keeping someone on life support to raping someone daily
The only difference is the magnitude of suffering, not that suffering is inflicted. Logically there must be an exchange rate between days on life support and rapes inflicted. I wonder what it is.

what is this totalitarian shit im seeing here

lol yea just let me take my infant son requiring intensive care on a commercial plane for 12+hours.

>kid is already a vegetable that can literally only suffer at this point
>disease is essentially extremely rare and aggressive forms of Alzheimer's and ALS combined; well studied diseases that we still have no answer to despite decades of study. This disease has had less than 20 known sufferers and all of them have failed to live past infancy even with various procedures
>doctor offering the "experimental procedure" acknowledges he has little understanding about the true nature of the disease and procedure; he's literally just another medical professional sociopath trying to get his name out there at the cost of millions to the parents and prolonged suffering to the child. The chances a unicorn will save this child are equal to the "doctors" chances.
>parents can only hold guardianship, not ownership, of the child. There are COUNTLESS precedents of states intervening on behalf of children when parents are objectively inflicting harm upon their child; regardless if this harm is committed with good intent. Reality and your feelings are two different things.

At no point can you excuse these fucking disgusting parents. They are dillusional morons literally just trying to avoid experiencing personal grief at the cost of guaranteed prolonging of the suffering and agony the poor infant is experiencing.

This isn't "muh big brother took muh kids" like the euro tabloids want you to think, it's "board of medical and ethical professionals are trying to stop irresponsible people from inflicting pain on a baby"