Parents Discover Hospital for Critically Ill Baby, Uncover Troubles of Socialized Medicine
What is the value of a human life?
How far would someone go to save their own child and what happens when a bureaucracy gets to make that decision instead of you?
The heartbreaking case of Indi Gregory, an 8-month-old British baby with a terminal genetic disorder, is the most recent example of what happens when you let the government dictate who is worth the chance at life.
Indi, an 8-month-old with mitochondrial disease, a disease which saps energy, had been receiving treatment at Nottingham’s Queen’s Medical Centre, but U.K. doctors had recommended withdrawing life support, stating that there was no cure for her condition, according to the Telegraph.
Doctors advised that continuing to keep Indi on life support was “futile,” and judges agreed that doctors could “lawfully limit the treatment they provide to Indi.”
Indi’s parents, Dean Gregory and Claire Staniforth, lost legal battles in U.K. courts, including the High Court, to keep her on life support against doctors’ recommendations and their case was not accepted at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg, France.
But now an Italian hospital, through the efforts of Christian Legal Centre, a campaign group, has offered to take over her care.
A representative for the Christian Legal Center said in a statement that a leading pediatric hospital in Italy has offered specialist treatment to Indi.
“Fully-funded by the Italian government, the Bambino Gesu Paediatric Hospital in Rome has agreed to accept Indi for treatment,” the representative said.
Indi’s parents are now begging the doctors at the Queen’s Medical Centre and the lawyers representing the hospital trust to allow them to transfer the child to Rome for treatment.
An Italian hospital has offered to treat a critically ill eight-month-old baby whose parents lost a legal battle for her to stay on life-support in the UK https://t.co/IFDz4eg60E
— Sky News (@SkyNews) October 30, 2023
An Italian hospital has offered to treat a critically ill eight-month-old baby whose parents lost a legal battle for her to stay on life-support in the UK https://t.co/IFDz4eg60E
— Sky News (@SkyNews) October 30, 2023
In a statement released through the Christian Legal Centre, Indi’s father, Gregory said: “We have been given a real chance by the Bambino Gesù Paediatric Hospital for Indi to get the care she needs and to have a longer life.”
“We are amazed and truly grateful to the hospital and the Italian government, which has restored our faith in humanity,” Gregory said, according to the BBC.
However, according to Sky News, on Monday, Christian Concern reported that Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust is unwilling to allow Indi Gregory’s parents to transfer her.
According to the trust, it is in Indi’s “best interests” to discontinue life support.
FUNDRAISER: Indi’s parents, Dean and Claire, have set up a GoFundMe as they desperately seek to preserve the life of their 8-month-old baby girl.
Join the mission to support Indi by clicking the link below. https://t.co/JKsZ1d1Cb4
— Christian Concern (@CConcern) October 30, 2023
A private hearing in the Family Division of the High Court in London is scheduled for Tuesday to determine if Indi’s parents will be granted permission to transfer her to Italy.
This is not the first time the U.K. has chosen to end a child’s life rather than allowing them a chance to fight.
In 2017, 11-month-old Charlie Gard, who had the same disease as Indi and who had been the subject of a prolonged battle fought by his parents on his behalf, was taken off life support, according to BBC News.
Prof Michio Hirano, an American neurologist had offered to give him nucleoside bypass therapy but as the case lingered eventually said it was too late to try.
In 2018, Alfie Evans, another British child had his life support shut off after his parents lost their battle to fight to save his life.
We’re heartbroken, say the parents of 23-month-old Alfie Evans, as they announce that the toddler died overnight https://t.co/HuaJV9UFIE
— BBC Breaking News (@BBCBreaking) April 28, 2018
Natalie Harp warns of the dangers of socialized medicine, invoking Charlie Gard.
“A terminally ill British baby whose government-run health care system decided it was too expensive and too cruel to keep him alive.” pic.twitter.com/fUWMJyY2NC
— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) August 25, 2020
Charlie Gard’s parents call for law to protect babies like Alfie Evans https://t.co/3ru8WLsYOl
— LifeSiteNews (@LifeSite) April 27, 2018
According to a Telegraph story tracking the National Health Service (NHS), Britain’s “single-payer” system of national health insurance says that the number of patients waiting to start treatment in England is now 7.8 million.
It’s an example of what happens when the government takes over the healthcare system and a warning to those still pushing for a Medicare-for-all type system.
As bone cancer survivor Natalie Harp said at the Republican National Convention in 2020, “In socialized medicine, you don’t beat the odds — you become the odds.”
The post Parents Find Hospital Willing to Treat Their Critically Ill Baby, But the Horror of Socialized Medicine Soon Becomes Clear appeared first on The Western Journal.
rnrn
Who should have the authority to decide whether someone should be given the opportunity to fight for their life in cases like Indi Gregory’s?
Life support, as they believe further treatment will not improve her overall condition or quality of life.
This case raises important questions about the value placed on a human life and who should be making decisions about life-saving treatment.
In the case of Indi Gregory, the doctors and judges involved determined that continuing life support was futile and not in the best interests of the child. However, her parents and the Christian Legal Centre believe that the Italian hospital offers a chance for her to receive specialized treatment and potentially have a longer life.
This raises the question of who should have the power to decide whether someone should be given the opportunity to fight for their life. Should it be the government or medical professionals who make these decisions, or should it be left to the parents and the individual themselves?
It is clear that in cases like Indi Gregory’s, there is a conflict of interests and differing opinions on what constitutes the value of a human life. Some may argue that the government and medical professionals should make these decisions based on what they believe to be in the best interests of the individual. They may consider factors such as the likelihood of success of treatment, the quality of life that could be achieved, and the cost and resources involved.
On the other hand, parents may argue that they have a unique understanding and love for their child that cannot be replicated by anyone else. They may believe that every life should be given a chance, regardless of the outcome. They may also argue that they should have the right to seek treatment options elsewhere if they feel that their child is not being given the best chance at life.
Ultimately, the question of the value of a human life is complex and does not have a simple answer. It is influenced by personal beliefs, cultural values, and societal norms. There is no definitive answer as to who should have the power to make life or death decisions for someone else.
What is important is that these discussions are had in a thoughtful and compassionate way, taking into account the unique circumstances of each case. Each decision should be made with the best interests of the individual at heart, considering both the medical realities and the emotional and moral dimensions of the situation.
The case of Indi Gregory highlights the challenges and ethical dilemmas that arise when decisions about life-saving treatment are not left solely in the hands of the individual and their loved ones. It is a reminder of the importance of considering the value of a human life and the potential impact of bureaucratic decision-making on those who are most vulnerable.
Ultimately, the value of a human life should be determined by a combination of medical expertise, individual autonomy, and compassion for the unique circumstances of each case. It is a complex issue that requires careful consideration and a commitment to upholding the dignity of every human being.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...