| Jehovah's Witnesses on 23:31 - Sep 1 with 1160 views | controversial_jack |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 23:22 - Sep 1 by Pacemaker |
The hospital made a complaint that the child's health was in danger, they are the experts, therefore by law both the social services who are there to protect children and the police have to act.
Whether the doctors have over-reacted to "awkward" parents is yet to be seen, equally I have had experience of determined but misinformed parents in a similar situation, it's a no win situation because they were in such a dark place and convinced that information on the internet was the saviour for their child.
There is no way that you can convince people to stop and just think about things. Equally I have come across some inept medical staff who have not shown any sympathy, diplomacy or empathy for patients.
The child should be the only concern for everybody, he seems to have been forgotten in this most recent tragedy. |
Just because the doctors made a complaint, it doesn't mean they were right. If the parents believe they can get better treatment elsewhere then that's fine and not in the least bit unlawful
Awkward parents? Parents have the right to do what they believe is best for the child and they need nobody's approval to do so
The Docs , Police have overreacted and seems the judge or magistrate has just rubber stamped the application |  | |  |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 23:32 - Sep 1 with 1159 views | Pacemaker |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 23:14 - Sep 1 by controversial_jack |
If the parents are charged with attempted murder or other such nonsense and nothing bad happens to the child, surely, the police would be open to a serious charge themselves, such as perverting the course of justice or perjury? |
The police have not had the ability to "charge" people with offences since 1985. The CPS decide who will be charged and what with, the police role in all investigations is to gather evidence, they submit this to the CPS.
The European Arrest Warrant is applied for by the prosecutor following a report submitted by the police, this would have consisted of a report from the medical staff that the child was in danger and likely to come to real harm.
If this is not the case the police and CPS will not have committed any offences as they have acted in good faith. The hospital may find themselves subject to legal action if they are shown to have embellished the facts.
The parents could be prosecuted for neglect of the child by removing him from Hosp if it is shown that harm would come to him if they did.
I have tried to debate with you on several occasions but you have a closed mind to facts other than your opinion. You are going to find life very controversial. [Post edited 1 Sep 2014 23:35]
|  |
| Life is an adventure or nothing at all. |
| |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 23:49 - Sep 1 with 1134 views | perchrockjack |
Police actually prosecuted in the mags court. They were better than cps dross briefs.cheaper too | |
| |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 23:53 - Sep 1 with 1134 views | controversial_jack |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 23:32 - Sep 1 by Pacemaker |
The police have not had the ability to "charge" people with offences since 1985. The CPS decide who will be charged and what with, the police role in all investigations is to gather evidence, they submit this to the CPS.
The European Arrest Warrant is applied for by the prosecutor following a report submitted by the police, this would have consisted of a report from the medical staff that the child was in danger and likely to come to real harm.
If this is not the case the police and CPS will not have committed any offences as they have acted in good faith. The hospital may find themselves subject to legal action if they are shown to have embellished the facts.
The parents could be prosecuted for neglect of the child by removing him from Hosp if it is shown that harm would come to him if they did.
I have tried to debate with you on several occasions but you have a closed mind to facts other than your opinion. You are going to find life very controversial. [Post edited 1 Sep 2014 23:35]
|
I take it you have not heard the term unlawful arrest? Of course it's up the CPS to decide to prosecute or not, but the police arrest, detain and charge. I agree, we do not need to justify our actions to the police only a Jury. It's not just the police though if you took the time to read my previous post, it's the Doctors, social service and Judges who have all colluded in this disgraceful affair | | | |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 23:56 - Sep 1 with 1133 views | perchrockjack |
Funnily enough ,when people break the law, they often dont want to go to be charged so they are arrested. It's actually possible to simply report for Summons for certain offences but it's all about verification.m | |
| |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 00:03 - Sep 2 with 1129 views | controversial_jack |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 23:56 - Sep 1 by perchrockjack |
Funnily enough ,when people break the law, they often dont want to go to be charged so they are arrested. It's actually possible to simply report for Summons for certain offences but it's all about verification.m |
Being a bit pedantic, a summons is merely an invitation which you can decline. | | | |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 09:28 - Sep 2 with 1075 views | Pacemaker |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 23:53 - Sep 1 by controversial_jack |
I take it you have not heard the term unlawful arrest? Of course it's up the CPS to decide to prosecute or not, but the police arrest, detain and charge. I agree, we do not need to justify our actions to the police only a Jury. It's not just the police though if you took the time to read my previous post, it's the Doctors, social service and Judges who have all colluded in this disgraceful affair |
But not the parents?
Collusion is a totally over the top description. Hospital have come to a decision which should be evidenced based , every action from there on will be driven by the original report.
When you consider the parents had not booked any treatment had not sold their flat to pay for any treatment and had taken him from hospital then what are you supposed to do?
There is a necessity test around arresting anyone these days but one of the grounds is the protection of a child from harm.
As for a summons being an invitation you can ignore then give it a gogo and see what happens. The clue is in the name check a definition of summons. An arrest warrant is almost always issued if you fail to answer a summons to attend court.
When you have matured you may have more experience of life and the reality of having to make difficult decisions which will not be popular with other people. | |
| Life is an adventure or nothing at all. |
| |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 10:22 - Sep 2 with 1054 views | MillJack |
Some thoroughly embarrassing comments in the early part of this thread, but to an extent understandable given the nature of the reporting in the UK press. However, I don't see many of you detracting said statements in light of the evidence, simply trying to justify your initial stance.
It boils down to one thing - the parents are trying to do what, in their minds, is the best thing for their child. They haven't done anything illegal, they haven't tried to stop the child having treatment, they have simply tried to get into a position where the child can be given the treatment which they believe is most beneficial, one that our NHS are unable to provide. It should also be said that the treatment they want has proven to be incredibly effective in similar cases.
Basically, the Doctor in this country who suggested chemo has got the hump because the obviously knowledgeable parents have guzzumped him/her and their suggestion. The overreaction amongst law enforcement, etc. is an absolute disgrace and we now have a situation where an ill child can't see his parents as they've been detained by police. A situation which is infinitely worse than what would have arisen if the parents had just been allowed to do what they wanted to for THEIR child.
And for those suggesting that our NHS is somehow infallible then you obviously haven't spent much time in and around it. My missus is a nurse and some of the horror stories she tells me about Doctor's working within our NHS are, to say the least, worrying. This is still a health service that continues to promote out-of-date eating guidelines in light of 30 years of evidence that their "healthy" diet leads to obesity, high cholesterol and a myriad of chronic health problems, and that's just one example. We're a third world nation when it comes to healthcare and you can hardly knock the parents for seeking alternatives. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 11:09 - Sep 2 with 1044 views | Batterseajack |
I hold my hands up and say I jumped to conclusions based on what was reported at the time.
It appears that the parents do have the child's health at the top of their priorities, but have gone about this in a horrendous way. It is not unusual for the NHS to allow patients to go abroad to seek medical help if the treatment is deemed suitable AND better than what we have available here. But this is the case of a father armed with the internet thinking he knows more than a consultant who specialises in this area.
Assuming the doctor thinks that this proton treatment will not be of benefit to the child in this case, he is must seek help from the law to ensure that the child receives the best treatment. On the flip side, if the doctor does think its better treatment, then how transparent were the parents with explaining their motives to the doctor? | | | |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 11:09 - Sep 2 with 1041 views | controversial_jack |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 09:28 - Sep 2 by Pacemaker |
But not the parents?
Collusion is a totally over the top description. Hospital have come to a decision which should be evidenced based , every action from there on will be driven by the original report.
When you consider the parents had not booked any treatment had not sold their flat to pay for any treatment and had taken him from hospital then what are you supposed to do?
There is a necessity test around arresting anyone these days but one of the grounds is the protection of a child from harm.
As for a summons being an invitation you can ignore then give it a gogo and see what happens. The clue is in the name check a definition of summons. An arrest warrant is almost always issued if you fail to answer a summons to attend court.
When you have matured you may have more experience of life and the reality of having to make difficult decisions which will not be popular with other people. |
You say the Doctors have come to a decision, well Bully for them. I didn't realise the medical profession had any authority to do such a thing.You say it's evidence based, what evidence? The parents believe they can get better and alternative treatment elsewhere.
Patients can at any time refuse medical treatment and remove themselves or their children from hospital whenever they like
As for a summons, it is a civil matter and not criminal so you can decline to attend any court hearing and no arrest warrant will be issued. You may be ruled against in your absence , but that's your choice. And here we see the crux of the matter," choice". Something that we supposedly have in this country, and which obviously eludes your way of thinking and understanding
Yes it is collusion, what else can it be, if all parties get together and come to a decision without consulting the parents? | | | |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 11:17 - Sep 2 with 1037 views | MillJack |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 11:09 - Sep 2 by Batterseajack |
I hold my hands up and say I jumped to conclusions based on what was reported at the time.
It appears that the parents do have the child's health at the top of their priorities, but have gone about this in a horrendous way. It is not unusual for the NHS to allow patients to go abroad to seek medical help if the treatment is deemed suitable AND better than what we have available here. But this is the case of a father armed with the internet thinking he knows more than a consultant who specialises in this area.
Assuming the doctor thinks that this proton treatment will not be of benefit to the child in this case, he is must seek help from the law to ensure that the child receives the best treatment. On the flip side, if the doctor does think its better treatment, then how transparent were the parents with explaining their motives to the doctor? |
Some fair points but we obviously view things from a different standpoint. I don't see that the parents have gone about it in a horrendous way, they've acted within the law and in a manner that they believe was in the best interests of their child. It has been the overreaction has caused the issue, not the parents decision.
"But this is the case of a father armed with the internet thinking he knows more than a consultant who specialises in this area."
The sad fact is that many people, armed with a broadband connection, spare time and specific motivation could trump many "Doctors" knowledge in regards to many of the things they are supposed to specialise in. That is not an opinion, that's a fact. I have experience of it. | | | |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 11:19 - Sep 2 with 1035 views | Batterseajack |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 11:09 - Sep 2 by controversial_jack |
You say the Doctors have come to a decision, well Bully for them. I didn't realise the medical profession had any authority to do such a thing.You say it's evidence based, what evidence? The parents believe they can get better and alternative treatment elsewhere.
Patients can at any time refuse medical treatment and remove themselves or their children from hospital whenever they like
As for a summons, it is a civil matter and not criminal so you can decline to attend any court hearing and no arrest warrant will be issued. You may be ruled against in your absence , but that's your choice. And here we see the crux of the matter," choice". Something that we supposedly have in this country, and which obviously eludes your way of thinking and understanding
Yes it is collusion, what else can it be, if all parties get together and come to a decision without consulting the parents? |
Patients can refuse treatment, but as the patient in this case is a child, then the doctor assumes what is appropriate, not the parents armed with information or even disinformation freely available on the internet.
Trouble with the internet, its so vast and unregulated that there's always evidence out there to back almost any claim. | | | |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 11:28 - Sep 2 with 1024 views | Batterseajack |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 11:17 - Sep 2 by MillJack |
Some fair points but we obviously view things from a different standpoint. I don't see that the parents have gone about it in a horrendous way, they've acted within the law and in a manner that they believe was in the best interests of their child. It has been the overreaction has caused the issue, not the parents decision.
"But this is the case of a father armed with the internet thinking he knows more than a consultant who specialises in this area."
The sad fact is that many people, armed with a broadband connection, spare time and specific motivation could trump many "Doctors" knowledge in regards to many of the things they are supposed to specialise in. That is not an opinion, that's a fact. I have experience of it. |
I meant horrendous as in they're now banged up in a Spanish cell with their little boy now on his own.
They also took the child from hospital with minimal battery supply and without assurances to the doctor that the child will receive medical treatment. Acting in the best interest of the child, they doctors had to do everything they could to get the child back.
As for the internet, I've heard first hand off doctors that patients armed with a little bit of knowledge obtained from google and wikipedia, and not in possession of the whole facts is the bane of their lives.
What makes you think that a specialist doctor knows less than a guy off the street armed with an ipad in their chosen topic? | | | |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 11:33 - Sep 2 with 1019 views | MillJack |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 11:09 - Sep 2 by controversial_jack |
You say the Doctors have come to a decision, well Bully for them. I didn't realise the medical profession had any authority to do such a thing.You say it's evidence based, what evidence? The parents believe they can get better and alternative treatment elsewhere.
Patients can at any time refuse medical treatment and remove themselves or their children from hospital whenever they like
As for a summons, it is a civil matter and not criminal so you can decline to attend any court hearing and no arrest warrant will be issued. You may be ruled against in your absence , but that's your choice. And here we see the crux of the matter," choice". Something that we supposedly have in this country, and which obviously eludes your way of thinking and understanding
Yes it is collusion, what else can it be, if all parties get together and come to a decision without consulting the parents? |
Perfectly put. That was the point I'd wanted to make!
Where does the parents choice come into this? Or the child's choice? It has been reported that the doctors informed the child's parents that they would take out some sort of injunction against them and have the child forcibly removed from their custody, if they refused the treatment offered by the NHS. How can that possibly be right??
In 99% of cases, parents only want what is best for their child. If it were my son in a similar situation you're damn right I would spend time online researching the best treatments, where you can get them, pros and cons, etc.
The treatments in this country are driven (mainly) by cost and not necessarily what is best for the patient. In this case the parent wanted something that the NHS couldn't, for whatever reason, offer and therefore decided to try elsewhere. And for doing what they thought would best help their son they've been publically hung out to dry.
And, the fact remains, the outcome that has come about is far more damaging to the child than any treatment the parents were trying to get for him. | | | |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 11:53 - Sep 2 with 1009 views | MillJack |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 11:28 - Sep 2 by Batterseajack |
I meant horrendous as in they're now banged up in a Spanish cell with their little boy now on his own.
They also took the child from hospital with minimal battery supply and without assurances to the doctor that the child will receive medical treatment. Acting in the best interest of the child, they doctors had to do everything they could to get the child back.
As for the internet, I've heard first hand off doctors that patients armed with a little bit of knowledge obtained from google and wikipedia, and not in possession of the whole facts is the bane of their lives.
What makes you think that a specialist doctor knows less than a guy off the street armed with an ipad in their chosen topic? |
Whether we like it or not, Doctors decisions in this country are based around cost first and suitability of treatment second.
The fact is that we live in a time where information is freely available on the internet and people can arm themselves with knowledge. Medical professions don't like it because they are being shown up for the frauds that they are.
The majority of Doctors/Specialists are interested only in feathering their own nests, not in the welfare of their patients. They are not held accountable for their actions anywhere near enough and as a result don't bother to increase their learning, or develop their knowledge, but then get the hump because Joe Public has taken the time to learn more than them on the internet.
Put it this way, if that was my son I would know every potential treatment, it's pros and cons, alternatives, etc. I would arm myself with the maximum amount of knowledge so that I could assist in making an informed decision regarding the treatment of MY son. I wouldn't need a certificate, or qualification, to tell me that I had done everything to find out how I could help my son, and just because they have a certificate on the wall doesn't mean that they always know best, in fact quite the opposite. | | | |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 12:12 - Sep 2 with 996 views | Batterseajack |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 11:53 - Sep 2 by MillJack |
Whether we like it or not, Doctors decisions in this country are based around cost first and suitability of treatment second.
The fact is that we live in a time where information is freely available on the internet and people can arm themselves with knowledge. Medical professions don't like it because they are being shown up for the frauds that they are.
The majority of Doctors/Specialists are interested only in feathering their own nests, not in the welfare of their patients. They are not held accountable for their actions anywhere near enough and as a result don't bother to increase their learning, or develop their knowledge, but then get the hump because Joe Public has taken the time to learn more than them on the internet.
Put it this way, if that was my son I would know every potential treatment, it's pros and cons, alternatives, etc. I would arm myself with the maximum amount of knowledge so that I could assist in making an informed decision regarding the treatment of MY son. I wouldn't need a certificate, or qualification, to tell me that I had done everything to find out how I could help my son, and just because they have a certificate on the wall doesn't mean that they always know best, in fact quite the opposite. |
As I've already said, the internet is a wonderful and vast source of information and disinformation. You can virtually find anything online to back any viewpoint. Don't you see that as being problematic? Who says that proton therapy is even appropriate in this child's specific case?
Secondly, I don't stand by your opinion of doctors. Whist there are financial factors at play, it is a highly competitive occupation where only the best and dedicated get to the top of their chosen field and you'll soon get left behind if you start resting on your laurels. Another fact worth considering it that the NHS has repeatedly allowed patients to be treated in other countries if the equivalent level of treatment cannot be given here. | | | |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 12:36 - Sep 2 with 986 views | MillJack |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 12:12 - Sep 2 by Batterseajack |
As I've already said, the internet is a wonderful and vast source of information and disinformation. You can virtually find anything online to back any viewpoint. Don't you see that as being problematic? Who says that proton therapy is even appropriate in this child's specific case?
Secondly, I don't stand by your opinion of doctors. Whist there are financial factors at play, it is a highly competitive occupation where only the best and dedicated get to the top of their chosen field and you'll soon get left behind if you start resting on your laurels. Another fact worth considering it that the NHS has repeatedly allowed patients to be treated in other countries if the equivalent level of treatment cannot be given here. |
Of course, you're entitled to you opinion of Doctors, and I'm not sure of your background so it may or may not be an opinion based on real time spent with qualified health practitioners?
However, my opinion is formed from having a wife who has worked as a staff nurse in the NHS for over a decade and from personal experience of recruiting Doctors (of all levels) for NHS trusts across the UK. They are, on the whole, a complete waste of time, lacking even the most basic of knowledge in order to carry out their duties correctly, regularly relying on nurses and, in some cases, domestic staff to tell them what needs to be done for patients (because they haven't got clue).
Yes, they've served their time in University and got their certificates, etc but I wouldn't trust most of them with my son or family. They are there to be questioned not blindly followed. The numbers of deaths caused by negligence of Doctors in this country should be a national scandal but it's conveniently swept under the carpet. | | | |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 12:46 - Sep 2 with 976 views | Johnw102 |
Is it just me, or are there some double standards going on here . The McCanns leave three children, one of which is abducted and suffer no official consequences. The King family remove a child from hospital to seek, what they believe (rightly or wrongly) is the best treatment for the child, resulting in hounding them across Europe, with the parents now in custody, uncharged and with the child hundreds of miles away, separated from the family. Something does not add up here. |  |
| Never knew getting old would happen so quick! |
| |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 12:52 - Sep 2 with 973 views | MillJack |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 12:46 - Sep 2 by Johnw102 |
Is it just me, or are there some double standards going on here . The McCanns leave three children, one of which is abducted and suffer no official consequences. The King family remove a child from hospital to seek, what they believe (rightly or wrongly) is the best treatment for the child, resulting in hounding them across Europe, with the parents now in custody, uncharged and with the child hundreds of miles away, separated from the family. Something does not add up here. |
It's alright the McCann's were acting in the best interests of their child and not negligent in any way. This child's parents are ignoring the advice of a healthcare professional, something which is punishable by death it would seem. | | | |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 13:25 - Sep 2 with 961 views | Batterseajack |
You guys have completely lost with the McCann analogy so I think I'll leave it there for now. | | | |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 18:23 - Sep 2 with 914 views | controversial_jack |
Seems the CPS has seen sense and dropped the case. I'm glad they have listened to me and taken my advice. Now, charge the Police with unlawful arrest at the very least, maybe even perverting the course of justice in making up bogus charges. The Judge who rubber stamped the warrant should be removed from service | | | |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 18:24 - Sep 2 with 914 views | controversial_jack |
Case been dropped. Seems you are wrong once again,Darren | | | |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 18:28 - Sep 2 with 913 views | perchrockjack |
I hope the lad will be ok | |
| |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 18:34 - Sep 2 with 908 views | controversial_jack |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 18:28 - Sep 2 by perchrockjack |
I hope the lad will be ok |
Of course! | | | |
| Jehovah's Witnesses on 18:40 - Sep 2 with 906 views | perchrockjack |
Goes without saying.
Difficult situation but as I've said blood transmissions are an issue .people die as a result including kids ehonarectrapped by this religion | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
