Ben Shapiro
‏Verified account @benshapiro

If you withheld water from your brain damaged toddler, you'd be brought up on child abuse charges. If a British hospital does it, it's just "dying with dignity."

quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:
I was amazed at how many people see absolutely nothing wrong with starving to death an infant
)

In my opinion, they are the same people who see nothing wrong with abortion.

Not letting the family leave is unimaginably indefensible. Franz Kafka couldn't have thought this up.

I'd like one of their tabloid reporters to shove a microphone in the face of one of the 'royals' and get a comment on this situation.

I've got it. New words for Rule Britannia:

Days past in Britannia, we ruled a bunch of stuff!
But now we let our gov't torment us while we sit on our duff!

And to think that the British once though themselves the most "civilized" people in the world.

How far they have fallen.

Alfie has passed. Poor little kid.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...-died/?noredirect=on

To hell with the people who murdered him in the name of socialism.

Anyone who can rationalize this is certifiably insane.

April 27, 2018

Alfie Evans: Another Child Sacrifice on Britain's NHS Altar
By Joe Herring

I admit, my reaction to the plight of young Alfie Evans is colored by my experience with my own grandson, Joseph, who suffers from a similar disorder.

I see Joseph's innocence in Alfie's eyes, and I struggle with the marked physical resemblance between Alfie and Joseph at that age. I also vividly recall the doctors counseling my daughter to abort her pregnancy, to save her child from suffering.

"He will likely live 18 months, certainly no more than three years," they told us solemnly. Joseph celebrated his 17th birthday in February of this year.

Regular readers of my columns will know his story...how the long sought diagnosis finally came after 16 years of trying, and how the discovery of his specific disorder (he is the only known case worldwide) revealed a function of human DNA previously unknown to science – a function the understanding of which is changing the way medicines are made.

I see Joseph's smile on Alfie's lips and recognize that look of trust and love. My heart is shredded over the arrogant, brutal indifference of the British National Health Service, willing to starve a child to death rather than risk another hospital proving its doctors wrong.

In a world distressingly familiar with violence, injustice, and hatred, a circumstance such as this – avoidable, by no means necessary – will torture our souls, as those charged with preventing man's inhumanity toward man pivot from protector to executioner at the behest of misbegotten laws designed to empower the state at the expense of the citizen, in service to collectivism as god.

Like the Nuremburg laws that made the atrocities of the Nazis all perfectly legal, even obligatory, England has adopted legislation that permits the doyens of the NHS to abrogate the rights of both patient and family with little more than a formal request to supine family courts, increasingly eager to burnish the reputation of their empty-suit, single-payer health care system.

Alfie suffers from a degenerative brain disorder of unknown origin, and it is the opinion of his medical team at Liverpool's Alder Hey Pediatric Hospital that little of his brain remains and that further treatment or life-sustaining efforts would not be in the child's "best interests."

In Britain's socialized medical system, second opinions are typically given by other NHS physicians, chosen not by the parents or the patient, but by the attending physician who gave the first opinion. Unsurprisingly, second opinions in the NHS rarely overturn the first. In this case, however, Alfie's parents were able to force the hospital to release records for outside review.

Unsurprisingly, Alder Hey's prognosis has not been confirmed by outside medical professionals. Indeed, numerous outside experts vehemently disagree with Alder Hey's conclusions.

The disturbing truth is, the physicians of Alder Hey haven't even attempted to determine the cause of Alfie's distress, having decided within months of his birth that his life was not worth living.

As revealed by the attorney for Alfie's father, Tom Evans, the position of the NHS is indeed far uglier than it appears at first blush. As reported by multiple British newspapers:

While the medical team have maintained that young Alfie cannot survive absent the use of a ventilator, (they predicted he would die within minutes of being removed from the ventilator, and as of the time of this writing, young Alfie has been breathing unaided for more than 60 hours) they have further argued that he would have an "insufficient quality of life," even if he managed to survive.

Tom's attorney:

We do not challenge the medical report ... [but it is] another thing to say that your life is futile because your quality of life is not deemed sufficient[.]

Like the parents of Charlie Gard – another child similarly condemned to death by a preening NHS – Alfie's parents disagreed with the hospital's plans to abandon further treatment and remove life support from their son. They began to investigate alternatives for care outside the NHS system, never suspecting that the state-run system would see their love for their child as a threat to the NHS and would respond with ferocity.

Alder Hey's physicians have been unrelenting in their abandonment of this child, having decided more than a year ago, in February of 2017, that Alfie should quit embarrassing them by surviving in spite of receiving no treatment and get on with the business of the afterlife.

Since making that decision, the hospital has refused to perform even the most common of procedures for a patient with Alfie's needs, such as a tracheostomy to facilitate easier breathing or a gastrostomy feeding tube for nutrition and medication.

For all this time, Alfie has been fed through a nasal tube, never intended as a permanent solution, but rather as a stopgap (weeks, not months) designed to be used until a g-tube can be placed.

The medical treatment Alfie has received is abominable, as a direct result of the hospital's decision, and subsequent criminal obstinacy toward anyone suggesting that their prognosis might be in error.

To hear the barristers for Alder Hey wax poetic about the "first class care" given Alfie by the NHS (parroted by judge after judge in court proceedings) is indeed revolting – the British equivalent of Baghdad Bob. In truth, they have made no attempt to diagnose Alfie's condition, preferring instead to place him on heavily sedating anti-seizure medications, then claiming that his lethargy is further evidence of his irreversible decline.

The world is witness to slow-motion murder. The perpetrators are the NHS, and the motive is not pecuniary, but rather a perverse form of institutional vanity.

Italy has conferred citizenship to Alfie, and there is a medical air ambulance standing by at the request of the pope to fly Alfie to the Vatican's children's hospital, Bambino Gesù, where Alfie can be treated.

But while socialism requires citizen confidence to operate, it will settle for coercion to gain compliance. This is why Alder Hey refuses to release #Alfie. Should the boy survive outside NHS care, their "infallibility" would be shattered, and (gasp!) the sheep may begin to question their shepherd.

Collectivist schemes of medicine are no more sustainable (or just!) than collectivist schemes of societal order. Both require submission, even unto death.

Once that logic is accepted as legitimate, the line will be pushed back farther and farther in future cases until a mere diagnosis is sufficient cause for the state to "act in the patient's best interest."

I can find no difference between the rationalizations of the Nazis and the arguments being made against Alfie Evans by the NHS.

A great many evils are cloaked in "compassion"; indeed, it is a rarity when evil stands naked before its victim. Nowhere is this truth more evident than in the "compassion" of Alder Hey Hospital toward Alfie Evans.

Would that all of Britain rose up and demanded the release of Alfie before death has its way. I pray for him, and for the charred souls of those who will be left behind – living victims of unconscionable state cruelty.

The only "life unworthy of life" is that of the arrogant, self-congratulatory medical murderers of the NHS and their judicial enablers. May God's judgment be realized in the fullest.

https://www.americanthinker.co...tains_nhs_altar.html

And such is the result of "socialized" medicine.


This is so terrible and heinous an occurrence that there are no words to express the anger I know so many of us feel and the inhumanity that was necessary to demand that this be the only alternative or result. I feel so very sorry for the parents and the child. The UK can forget me or my family ever visiting there or having anything to do with them. With what has occurred in this case and what has been going on in London for some time, it is clear that they have slowly become an ally of tradition and convenience for the US. Nothing more. I do not judge all the Britons by their government and medical system but I would expect them to at least try and change the course of the UK to a more conservative direction in the coming years. Churchill is probably rolling over in his grave.

And this is the system the ultra left wants for the US. Single payer health care is a goal of theirs. Heaven help us if they end up with the majority in the house and senate.

Jim

quote:

Originally posted by Mars_Attacks:
The Americans have stormed the beaches of the Merseyside FB page.

I’ve not been on Facebook in two years. I just came out of retirement for this.

England is not a "free country". All the "citizens" are still subjects of the monarchy. It does have the Magna Carta and other governing documents but it does not have the freedom our Constitution guarantees for us.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Send a few bobbies over here and try that shit. I have ancestors who shot at you sons of bitches and ran you the fuck out of this country.

This is the only time I wish I had Twitter and Facebook accounts.

Some of mine were involved in that action as well.

God bless this kid. If there is a heaven, he is there now. I wept for him, as if he were my son.

This makes me speechlessly furious. Dollars before children. The powers that be have lost their fucking minds.

It’s a new version, far more pitiful, of “The Prince and the Pauper.”

What if Prince Louis had been born in this medical condition? Would the courts have tried, or been able, to prevent him from receiving whatever care his royal parents desired?

The disgrace of socialism can be especially tragic and horrible.

April 29, 2018

Alfie Evans, the State, and Us

You think the issue of the baby in England is just another story of individuals dealing with a personal tragedy? You're wrong. The story involves all of us. It involves all of us in a very serious manner. It is part of the thus far nonviolent civil war we fight here in America – a war, again, like the first Civil War, for the soul of our country. It is the war between Western, liberal Judeo-Christian values and the values of leftism. It's a war between the individual as the focus of our lives and culture and the big state as the focus.

Just look at the stark realities that have played out in England. Its health care system is now completely absorbed by the state. (Ours is well on the way.) The focus was the state, faceless, unaccountable, a massive bureaucracy armed with tremendous power shared with the politicians up in their distant offices, the unelected judges with their lifetime appointments, and the government employee doctors all on one side, and the individuals – Mom, Dad, and the baby – on the other. Who do you suppose won this give-and-take, this health care transaction? Talk about inequality. Those on the left are livid if the guy next door has a BMW and themselves only a Toyota, but they don't blink an eye at the truly massive inequality inherent in state versus individual power. The state in England crushed Mom. The state eliminated Dad. And the state has told the baby his life is up, and he's ready to die. But of course, keep in mind that all the state actors wrap their actions in words of kindness, compassion, and what is best for all concerned, serving the will of the people, and acting for the common good – all their usual regressive Marxist claptrap.

Now, if this is the soul of America one is fighting for, I say a plague on your house. But this, indeed, is the soul the American left is battling for – the glorious state as the center of American life. This is what the Democratic Party, our N.Y. Times op-ed writers, our mainstream media and tech elites, our university professors, leftist clergy, and Hollywood stars are all lined up rallying for: government – big, controlling, iron-fisted power centered in Washington. They fight for this because no matter how smart, no matter the Yale or Princeton degree, no matter how sweet and well intentioned, American men and women of the left are now almost completely unmoored from the wisdom and liberalism of our great Western American Judeo-Christian values. They have bought into what all humans tend to be attracted to, the child in us all, the world of "take care of me forever, Mommy and Daddy." And government is, for them, that forever Mommy and Daddy of their fantasies.

Those of us who have retained control of that child within, channel instead the free adult inside, and have learned from our great Bible, from Western traditions and the American Founders – we fight this poison. It is because we know that though the state can bring some good to life, when it becomes the center of life, the dominant force in a society, when it overwhelms what should be the center – namely, the individual – great evil comes of that. That evil has come hard to England, and now it has moved on to America through our civil war between Americanism and leftism.

What comes of losing to the left is a child kidnapped by state actors for "his own good." What comes of losing to the left is the government standing in every examining room in America, every operating room, every emergency bay, unseen but present and powerful and demanding. It is an entity that knows nothing of you, that knows nothing of your life and family and desires and needs, but is there nonetheless saying loud and clear, "You will see the doctor I demand, have the test I think best, undergo the procedure I assess proper, accept the payment I think socially just, swallow the pill I approve, deal with your family member in the manner I prescribe, and if you disagree or push back, or do not comply, the fury and massive power we hold will be unleashed to confront you."

So, men and women of the left, cheer on your Obamacare, single-payer, Medicare for All, and Medicaid. Cheer on the child inside you. Cheer on socialism and all the degradation of life that comes with it. But if at the end of this civil war in America and you the left wins, keep in mind there is much to pay for this utter foolishness. Mom and Dad in the guise of the state are a demanding and controlling thing. Brace yourselves to live the degrading lives of children, as subjects of this raw and oppressive power. Keep in mind that it never, ever turns out well. Ask the parents in England, or their child. Ask the thousands who will die this year in England waiting to get the care they need. Ask the millions in socialist Cuba about not having an aspirin available in their hospitals.

Leftism poisons everything it touches, from our health care to our economy, our schools, universities, arts, sports, religious institutions, and even the Boy Scouts.

The child in Great Britain has no chance of ever even becoming a scout of any sort. The state in England is done with him and his parents. That's what Hope and Change are all about.

https://www.americanthinker.co...he_state_and_us.html

As sure as the nose on my face the British government tortured and murdered that boy. They should have just dosed him with some Zyklon B like their heroes did. More efficient.

I can't wait until the queen gets a terminal disease so I can watch them refuse her treatment and starve her to death.

It's no wonder why they embrace the muslim savages now. They think alike. That country can sink into the sea for all I care now.

Who Gets to Decide What Is in the Best Interest of Our Children?

Townhall.com
Kimberly Fletcher
April 3, 2018

The story of Alfie Evans, the 23-month-old boy forced off life support by the British Courts and hospital monitoring his case, has captivated the attention of the world. Many are still scratching their heads over this one. Social media is flooded with the story, and even the Pope weighed in. The U.K.’s government-run medical system, National Health Service (NHS), actually went to court to fight to end Alfie’s life. Dr. Ranj Singh, clinical technician with NHS said, “Withdrawing life support is not killing someone. It is redirecting care to make them more comfortable and give them the most dignifying life that you can.”

Shouldn’t the parents be the ones to decide that?

After Italy gave Alfie citizenship so his parents could take him to Rome for an experimental treatment, the Judge not only denied the family the right to take their son to Italy, he wouldn’t even let them take him home because he considered the parents a flight risk. As Tara Burton of VOX writes, “Ultimately…the Evans case was about who gets to decide what the best interest of a child really is.”

There is a major movement among government officials and agencies to usurp parental rights and authority. It is based on one word--fundamental.

The Supreme Court has classified all our rights into two basic groups: Fundamental and non-Fundamental—regardless of the fact there is no basis in history or law for such classifications.

According to constitutional lawyer Michael Farris, there is a big difference in these two categories when deciding legal cases. A fundamental right favors the citizen and the government bears the burden of proof. A non-fundamental right, however, presumes the government law or action is constitutional and the citizen has to present evidence there is no reasonable basis for the law or action.

In Alfie’s case, if parental rights were treated as fundamental, the dispute between the government and Alfie’s parents must begin with the premise that the parents are presumed to know what is best for their child. If parental rights are a fundamental right, they have full discretion and it is the government who bears a burden of proof to show otherwise. If parental rights are treated as non-Fundamental then the parents have to prove the law or action is unreasonable or unjustified; giving no legal presumption in favor of the parents' right to decide. All presumptions flow in favor of the government.

The right of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children is a fundamental right. Very few Americans would disagree with that. However, government agencies and court officials are attempting to define the government as "partners" with parents in raising their children declaring that parent's rights are non-fundamental when "the best interest of the child" is in question.

In December 2016, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services wrote a new draft policy statement about “helping” families stating, “It is the position of the Departments that all early childhood programs and schools recognize families as equal partners in improving children’s development, learning and wellness across all settings, and over the course of their children’s developmental and educational experiences.”

This idea has carried over into the education, welfare, and well-being of our children so far that government officials, community leaders, and media are actually openly claiming our children are not really ours. They claim they belong to the entire state and community. Political Commentator Melissa Harris-Perry actually did a commercial promoting the idea that our children belong to the collective community. Alan Scholl, Executive Director for Freedom Project Education, said, “The danger of government as a parent is an age-old battle.”

Reasonable thinking people would conclude the state would only enlist the "best interest of the child" scenario in cases of abuse or neglect. Unfortunately that is not the case. The state is taking their imposed "partnership" role far beyond any reasonable "best interest" situation.

In the fall of 2014, Cassandra, a 17 year-old girl from Connecticut, was taken from her mother by order of the court and forced to undergo chemotherapy against her will and wishes. Cassandra was diagnosed with Hodgkin’s lymphoma and decided, after receiving thorough medical advice that she did not want to receive chemotherapy. Her mother supported her decision and was then charged with neglect. The judge ordered Casandra to be removed from her home and custody given to the Department of Children and Families (DCF).

DCF, acting on behalf of the state, said they were obligated to intervene stating, "It's their duty to act when a child would die if medical decisions were left up to the parent."

Unless of course, as in Alfie’s case, the government decides death is the right intervention.

In Cassandra’s case the "best interest of the child" led to her being taken from her home and family, put into the custody of strangers and forced into a hospital where her legs and arms were strapped down so the hospital staff could forcibly administer chemo drugs—all while being supervised by police.

In New Hampshire in 2014, William Baer was arrested at a school board meeting for breaking the two minute rule while protesting a book his 14-year-old daughter was assigned to read. The book was riddled with graphic sexual content.

In 2013 two California parents, Alex and Anna Nikolayev, had their baby taken from them by force simply because they wanted a second opinion on their baby's medical care. "It’s like parents have not rights at all," said Alex.

Our rights come from God not government. So the question is, are parent’s rights Fundamental or non-Fundamental? Do we have a fundamental right to teach, raise, and nurture our children or don’t we?

When Nebraska Governor Pete Ricketts, was presented with the question he took a bold stand. “Parental rights are paramount,” said Ricketts, “and must have a clearly defined role in any state-sanctioned program that impacts a child.”

Finally some common sense.

Link