SAVED FROM SOCIALISM: U.S. Saves Baby Oliver After U.K. Doctors Said His Heart Couldn’t Be Fixed

[kyredneck]

SAVED FROM SOCIALISM: U.S. Saves Baby Oliver After U.K. Doctors Said His Heart Couldn’t Be Fixed

"After baby Oliver Cameron was denied necessary medical treatment and funding by the United Kingdom's National Health Service (NHS), doctors in the United States were able to save his life.

Baby Oliver was born with a rare heart condition known as cardiac fibroma. The socialized healthcare system in the U.K. was not equipped to perform the necessary surgery to remove the non-cancerous tumor in his heart. Oliver would have to be put on a list to receive a heart transplant, and even then, he would only be expected to live to the age of 15, at the longest.

But due to the innovation and ingenuity of the United States, the necessary surgery was not only available, but had a 100% success rate at the Boston Children's Hospital....."

 

[carpro]

SAVED FROM SOCIALISM: U.S. Saves Baby Oliver After U.K. Doctors Said His Heart Couldn’t Be Fixed

"After baby Oliver Cameron was denied necessary medical treatment and funding by the United Kingdom's National Health Service (NHS), doctors in the United States were able to save his life.

That's how it works with a system looking to give the best possible care to it's patients, instead of one that's looking to do the least that it can for the least amount of money.

Maximum benefit for the patient vs. minimum.

 

[Matt Black]

Not quite: the NHS agreed to fund the US treatment as we didn't have the doctors (NHS or private) in the UK with experience to perform this rare procedure.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/09/nhs-pay-babys-us-heart-surgery/amp/

 

[Covenanter]

Nothing to do with socialism vs capitalism. The U.K. public funded NHS pays for expertise only available abroad.

Would a baby in a family without insurance in the U.S. have received the treatment?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Nothing to do with socialism vs capitalism. The U.K. public funded NHS pays for expertise only available abroad.

Would a baby in a family without insurance in the U.S. have received the treatment?

No

 

[Covenanter]

Nothing to do with socialism vs capitalism. The U.K. public funded NHS pays for expertise only available abroad.

Would a baby in a family without insurance in the U.S. have received the treatment?

No

If that is the situation the assertion of the thread is totally refuted. The socialist inspired NHS saved the baby.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Nothing to do with socialism vs capitalism. The U.K. public funded NHS pays for expertise only available abroad.

Would a baby in a family without insurance in the U.S. have received the treatment?

Can you find a example where it wasn’t?

 

[Martin Marprelate]

That's how it works with a system looking to give the best possible care to it's patients, instead of one that's looking to do the least that it can for the least amount of money.

Maximum benefit for the patient vs. minimum.

Well it's interesting then that the USA ranks only 26th in the world for life expectancy, while the UK ranks 15th, which isn't fabulous but is at least better than Germany or Canada.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...ump-life-expectancy-rich-nations-US-lags.html

Stones and glass houses, methinks.

But it's great that US doctors could save the life of baby Oliver.

 

[kyredneck]

Not quite: the NHS agreed to fund the US treatment as we didn't have the doctors (NHS or private) in the UK with experience to perform this rare procedure.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/09/nhs-pay-babys-us-heart-surgery/amp/

Nothing to do with socialism vs capitalism. The U.K. public funded NHS pays for expertise only available abroad.

Would a baby in a family without insurance in the U.S. have received the treatment?

Thanks for the corrections. The OP article is misleading and incomplete.

 

[kyredneck]

the NHS agreed to fund the US treatment

The U.K. public funded NHS pays for expertise only available abroad.

The socialist inspired NHS saved the baby.

wellll, it seems their hand was forced to 'save the baby'. From the article:

"...The NHS, however, initially refused to pay for the roughly $260,000 parents Lydia and Tim Cameron needed to fund the trip and procedure required to save their baby.

"No parent should have to bury their child," Lydia said at the time, according to The Mirror. "For the NHS to say, 'we’re sorry, we can’t help.' is devastating."

"We asked if the NHS could fly the surgeon over here, but he’s not licensed to operate in the UK," she explained. "We asked if an English surgeon could learn the procedure, but they said no. So we must raise the money ourselves."

"Our NHS consultant has said if Boston agreed to treat Oliver then we had to get him there."

The couple did not have the funds to save Oliver, so they resorted to crowdfunding, opening a GoFundMe page and asking the public to donate.

After funding nearly $170,000 on their own and garnering international attention, the NHS's hand was forced. The government finally announced that they would allow and fund the necessary surgery at Boston Children's Hospital.

Professor Dominic Wilkinson at the Oxford Centre for Neuroethics said that the pressure was on the NHS to comply due to the recent case of U.K.-based baby Charlie Guard, who was denied medical treatment by the NHS despite other nations offering treatment. "I think the intense attention from the Charlie Gard case is likely to make those decision makers more conscious that they are under greater scrutiny and therefore that they have to be particularly careful in making a fair decision," he told The Telegraph.

Thankfully, Boston Children's Hospital was able to perform a successful surgery on 10-month-old baby Oliver in November of 2017. "When they told us Dr. del Nido had removed all of it, we were so happy we just burst into tears," said mother Lydia, according to the hospital's site...."

 

[David Kent]

There is a retired preacher over here who writes Bible Notes and the ocassional book. He said he was in a Pentecostal church for 15 years and attended hundreds of healing meetings but never saw one healing.

 

[church mouse guy]

Nothing to do with socialism vs capitalism. The U.K. public funded NHS pays for expertise only available abroad.

Would a baby in a family without insurance in the U.S. have received the treatment?

Yes, Medicaid would have paid. Where do you get these daft ideas?

 

[David Kent]

Oh Yes?

An American missionary pastor we know in France, who has been disabled for years, and over the years has been getting worse, believes that due to his age and disabilty believes he will have to return to US soon, wrote in his latest email.

After seeing the new specialist in Paris, Clare was given an appointment for another EMG to check out his muscles. We’re waiting to be contacted for any further tests / consultations. Meanwhile, the pain, muscle cramps, and spasms continue to worsen. Please pray that we can get some answers here where all the expenses are covered, before we go back to the States.

His name is Clare but he is male.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

David, his problem may be that he hasn't paid into the Social Security\Medicare system.

 

[David Kent]

David, his problem may be that he hasn't paid into the Social Security\Medicare system.

Probally as he has been in France for over 30 years. I don't know why he gets the treatment free in France. Unless it is because he is disabled,
Although we have an EU medical card which allows us to get treatment at the same rate as those in the country. We have to pay for Dr's and hospital visits in France and prescriptions. whereas here the French would only have to pay for the prescription,

 

[FollowTheWay]

That's how it works with a system looking to give the best possible care to it's patients, instead of one that's looking to do the least that it can for the least amount of money.

Maximum benefit for the patient vs. minimum.

There's no question the U.S. has some of the best medical facilities in the world (Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic, Johns hopkins, etc.). But how many people here have access to these facilities? We are outstanding at the high end but mediocre from there down.

 

[church mouse guy]

Probally as he has been in France for over 30 years. I don't know why he gets the treatment free in France. Unless it is because he is disabled,
Although we have an EU medical card which allows us to get treatment at the same rate as those in the country. We have to pay for Dr's and hospital visits in France and prescriptions. whereas here the French would only have to pay for the prescription,

Even if he never paid Social Security, he would get medical welfare or Medicaid.

 

[church mouse guy]

There's no question the U.S. has some of the best medical facilities in the world (Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic, Johns hopkins, etc.). But how many people here have access to these facilities? We are outstanding at the high end but mediocre from there down.

Our mental health system is poor as we have closed hospitals and left the mentally ill to wander the streets of the big cities as homeless since the 1960s.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

He may have paid into the French system.

Probally as he has been in France for over 30 years. I don't know why he gets the treatment free in France. Unless it is because he is disabled,

 

[David Kent]

Even if he never paid Social Security, he would get medical welfare or Medicaid.

I can't comment on that. I just cut that from his email and posted it without editing. He did have an appointement in Paris about a year ago, to have a scan, but he was too bent over to get into the machine. He now has a new surgeon.