• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Alfie Dies

TCassidy

Late-Administator Emeritus
Administrator
That children don't necessarily "belong" to their parents in certain circumstances eg: abuse, JWs refusing transfusions.
Are you accusing the parents, who are trying to save the child's life, of abuse?

And it is not the parents who are withholding medical care. It is the doctors, hospital, and NHS that want to, and in fact did, kill the boy.
 

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Are you accusing the parents, who are trying to save the child's life, of abuse?
No, I am saying that we both agree that there are some circumstances where the wishes of the parents are not paramount with regard to the care of their child; we disagree on what those circumstances are.

And it is not the parents who are withholding medical care. It is the doctors, hospital, and NHS that want to, and in fact did, kill the boy.
No, his brain condition ie: he didn't have one, killed him; the doctors, hospital and NHS kept his artificially alive for over a year.
 

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Where do they get their money?
HMCTS are funded by the Treasury but are run by a committee consisting of at least three judges and is accountable not just to the government but also to the judiciary, with the Lord Chief Justice able to terminate the dual accountability

Where do they get their money?
Again, the Treasury.

Now, you will probably think "Aha! 'He who pays the piper picks the tune': if the government pays for them then the government gets to control them, surely?" Actually, no: HMCTS is a partnership between the judiciary and the government and is operationally independent of the latter; judges frequently find the government and other public bodies to be in breach of the law via the process of judicial review. Similarly, NHS Foundation Trusts are semi-independent, being run by Governors, some of whom are appointed by government but others elected from within the local and medical community. The medics in turn are ethically and medically responsible not to the Trust employing them but to the doctor-run General Medical Council.

I can assure you therefore that no government minister had any role in the Alfie Evans decision making process.
 

TCassidy

Late-Administator Emeritus
Administrator
So, you finally admit the truth. Both are part of and/or controlled by the government. It took quite a while but the truth finally came out.
 

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Will you also accept that there are some circumstances where the wishes of the parents should be overridden by the clinical concerns of the doctors
 

TCassidy

Late-Administator Emeritus
Administrator
Will you also accept that there are some circumstances where the wishes of the parents should be overridden by the clinical concerns of the doctors
To save a child's life? Sure. To murder a child. Never. I draw the line at killing children.
 

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
So, the government is not controlled by the government and Parliament doesn't make the laws. Okay.
The government is answerable to the courts and to Parliament, not the other way round. The doctors are answerable to the General Medical Council. Is that clear enough for you?
 

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
To save a child's life? Sure. To murder a child. Never. I draw the line at killing children.
Right, so you do agree with the principle that parents do not have absolute rights over children. Now we can move on to the issue of the circumstances where that principle might apply. Consider the following scenario: a baby girl is terminally ill in hospital. The parents want her to spend the last few days of her life at home with them. The medical evidence is that to move her would inflict severe pain on her and hasten her end. Should they be allowed their wish?
 

TCassidy

Late-Administator Emeritus
Administrator
Right, so you do agree with the principle that parents do not have absolute rights over children.
Parents do not have the right to abuse their children nor to murder them nor to allow them to be murdered.

Consider the following scenario: a baby girl is terminally ill in hospital. The parents want her to spend the last few days of her life at home with them.
Non-sequitur. Please stick to the actual issue. Alfie was granted Italian citizenship so he could be treated in Italy with new methods that could possibly save, or at least extend, his life.

The doctors, hospital, and courts wanted to starve him to death instead. They won and murdered him. Get over it. Your country is run by a bunch of nazis.
 

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Parents do not have the right to abuse their children nor to murder them nor to allow them to be murdered.

Non-sequitur. Please stick to the actual issue. Alfie was granted Italian citizenship so he could be treated in Italy with new methods that could possibly save, or at least extend, his life.
Not a non-sequitur but germane to what we are discussing. Will you answer it?

The doctors, hospital, and courts wanted to starve him to death instead. They won and murdered him. Get over it. Your country is run by a bunch of nazis.
There is nothing accurate in this statement.
 

TCassidy

Late-Administator Emeritus
Administrator
Yep, just as I said. "a public body" "a statutory body" and its "functions derive from a statutory requirement."
 
Top