Effin' doctors!

[MillCreek]

http://www.npr.org/2017/08/01/540100976/drug-puts-a-750-000-price-tag-on-life?utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=science

An interesting article on how insurers and legislators look at the life vs. cost balance.

[Scout26]

The missing piece here is that the hospital (by most medical accounts including the parents expert) didn't want the baby to suffer agonising pain during a move for a most likely fruitless treatment. That is a reasonable position unless you think parents have an absolute right to make decisions to the point of agonising pain for their children.

Again, this was not a case about refusing treatment because it was fruitless. It was a case about refusing to move the child and thereby causing risk of great suffering to the point of death.

And that's not the hospital's, nor the NHS, nor even the doctor's decision to make.  It is the parents' and parents alone.   Just like how I can check myself or my kids out of the hospital anytime I wish. 

[zxcvbob]

Or perhaps children shouldn't be considered 'owned'. Humans aren't property.

Parents should be trusted with decision making, but not to the point where they believe their children are property which they can abuse, maim or kill. If someone wants to engage in extremely risky or lethal behavior after they turn 18, that's their business and they can consent. OTOH, attempting to kill your children, who can't consent to that sort of thing, is where the state SHOULD step in.

Of course, when it's wrapped in religion, it becomes even more of a tar pit. Obviously the government should be kept far away from religion, and vice versa. But people can and do claim anything is a religion. Drawing lines is tricky.

 

That's why I phrased it that way, because it's jarring.  As it should be.  And yet IMHO that seems to be the position of the state; the children are just chattel.

[De Selby]

And that's not the hospital's, nor the NHS, nor even the doctor's decision to make.  It is the parents' and parents alone.   Just like how I can check myself or my kids out of the hospital anytime I wish. 

You should see revdisks post. I don't believe it's good to see parents as having the automatic right to make decisions that result in agonising death for their children.

[RoadKingLarry]

The missing piece here is that the hospital (by most medical accounts including the parents expert) didn't want the baby to suffer agonising pain during a move for a most likely fruitless treatment. That is a reasonable position unless you think parents have an absolute right to make decisions to the point of agonising pain for their children.

Again, this was not a case about refusing treatment because it was fruitless. It was a case about refusing to move the child and thereby causing risk of great suffering to the point of death.

To paraphrase:
Blah blah blah, bullshit, blah blah blah, socialism is good, blah blah, America sucks, blah blah blah.
Bullshit, you are still trying to justify the socialist paradise refusing to allow potential life saving treatment of a child.

[mtnbkr]

Closing this one because people just can't be polite to others.

Chris