« Sheehanigans on Fox | Main | White House, Congress Working on UAE Compromise »

Baby Charlotte's Healthcare in England

Baby Charlottte is a brain damaged two year old girl living in England who brings great joy to her family and friends. Unfortunately, she contracted a virus (it's winter - it's going to happen) which as hampered her breathing. A British court has determined that her life isn't worth fighting for and has issued a ruling saying that all resuscitation should be denied if she stops breathing. Her parents are completely against this.

Baby Charlotte's health is fragile normally, so she will go through health scares like this again. This will cost Britain a lot of money. Since Britain has a nationalized healthcare system, funded by taxpayer money, it's in the state's best interest to let her die.

The British court is using the standard lie of "it's in her best interest," which our very own pro-death crowds have argued here.

Please pray for Baby Charlotte; she needs all the help she can get.

To keep up on Baby Charlotte's progress see the family's blog.

California Conservative has also posted about Baby Charlotte and posed this: "Is this the direction America is headed? Is this where the ACLU, and the "right to die" folks will take us?"

Hat tip: Michelle Malkin

Kim Priestap blogs at Kim Priestap: A Conservative Blog in Flyover Country


Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Baby Charlotte's Healthcare in England:

» Stop The ACLU linked with Pray For Baby Charlotte

Comments (12)

This is where Nationalized ... (Below threshold)

This is where Nationalized Health Service would lead us. This is what scares me about legalized euthanasia. And I live in Oregon!

However, think about all the folks dying and injured because they don't even have basic health care due to lack of universal insurance in this country. All the money diverted from what could have been public health or prevention being spent to prolong the lives by a few months of folks with inoperable lung cancer or end stage cardiovascular disease related to obesity and diabetes from poor dietary habits. Kids injured because they didn't have basic immunizations [be it for economic or "religious" reasons]. Its easy to rally and pray around a poster child, but we have a whole nation of folks here suffering as well that could use prayer and a little bit more.

I'm not for NHS, but lets look at the good and bad of our system and theirs before rushing to quick judgements and rallying to a "cause" that might distract us from greater problems at home.

This folks is the real face... (Below threshold)

This folks is the real face of Hillary Care. Sad fact is the lefties who want national health and see this sad child as not worth saving, are the same ones who would spend millions on endless appeals for death row scum.

Sad, and scary. I pray this... (Below threshold)

Sad, and scary. I pray this isn't where we're headed.

Hmmm.Kids... (Below threshold)


Kids injured because they didn't have basic immunizations

What on earth are you talking about? Immunizations for kids are *free*.

So you're against a National Healthcare System, but you decry the existing private healthcare system and want a national system to replace it?

You need to rethink your position on this as it doesn't seem to be all that coherent right now.

If I ever need to define sa... (Below threshold)

If I ever need to define sactimony to someone I will give them the link to this post.

Yes Britain has nationalised health care which is fundamentally flawed and cannot cope with needs of the nation. No argument there.

You have absolutely no proof, however, apart from the connection you have made in your own mind) to make the claim that the reason doctors have made this application is the cost of care. It could also be that a girl with no realistic chance of recovery is suffering trapped in a horribly damaged body and the parents are hoping for a miracle that anyone with medical training has long since realised is not going to happen, and that while her life brings great joy to other people, life is not bringing great joy to Charlotte.

I don't know what all the facts (and I would jump for joy too if a miracle did happen) but comment on the facts you know without extrapolation based on personal bias because you don't either.

Your phrase "A British court has determined that her life isn't worth fighting for" is a rewriting of the judges ruling. He said nothing of the sort.

I can not afford health car... (Below threshold)

I can not afford health care. I don't have a full-time job, so I can't get the bulk-discount that those jobs provide. The least expensive insurance plan would cost me over $10,000 a year and have a $500 deductible.

So health insurance is out of the question for me and my pregnant wife and two children.

But how is this case in Britain different than Sun Hudson in Texas? I am sure you guys must remember Sun Hudson, the infant that doctors killed against the mother's wishes. The law in Texas allows hospitals and doctors to withhold treatment for terminally ill patients that can not afford to pay for long-term treatment. The only substantive difference is that there is no central health insurer.

Britains health care is a mess because it's been inderfunded for years. Here in the US a single hospital has as much faceless and unaccoutable beauracracy as an entire Canadian province.

There was a case near where I live regarding a fellow that had fallen and broken both wrists. He paid $14,000 out-of-pocket for treament. He then looked at health care plans available from insurers and discovered that had he been insured, the same treatment would have cost over $16,000, once the premiums had been added to the huge deductible.

The health insurance scheme here in the US is seriously flawed and getting worse every passing day. Over the last 6 years we have seen exponentially increasing uninsured Americans. What, then, is to be done?

This has nothing to do with... (Below threshold)

This has nothing to do with the cost of treatment. To read your post you would assume that this little girl has a common cold. Charlotte has extensive brain and organ damage and is in constant pain. The decision not to continue to revive her has been made on compassionate grounds in order to end her suffering. People like you should be ashamed, you clearly don't care about how much pain this child is in your only motivation is to promote your own warped religious/political agenda.

Eh up.I'd just lik... (Below threshold)

Eh up.

I'd just like to point out that actually, our nationalised health service, although debt-ridden, is not anything to do with current attempts to withhold life-saving treatment from Charlotte and never will or can be. The entire system is designed to prevent that. The accountants are a long way removed from the bedsides of sick children.

The problem such as it is lies in the much more global phenomenon of the utter devaluing of people with severe disabilities and the arrogant assumptions by non-disabled doctors (they have only JUST started allowing people with, say, paraplegia to even enter medical school) that a life lived through a veil of diminished sight, hearing and comprehension is one better not lived at all. They are wrong, of course.

And - yes - Charlotte is very ill at the moment. It is possible (although I think it fairly unlikely) that even with full life support including resuscitation and intubation, she might die of this virus. Her lungs are very badly compromised - to put it crudely, she needs triple the usual amount of oxygen in her air which suggests to me that she's probably at one third of usual healthy lung function.

There is unspeakable hypocrisy, however, in the judge effectively only allowing her ventilation while she looked unlikely to need it - especially bearing in mind that when the order was lifted words were said to the effect of the doctors still having the final say but being obliged to consult with Charlotte's parents in the process.


Charlotte Wyatt is a very, ... (Below threshold)

Charlotte Wyatt is a very, very sick little girl. The doctors have been trying to withdraw life-prolonging medical care from her practically since she was born. She showed distinct signs of improvement after the last court case, though, and that shows she shouldn't be written off.

Although the doctors are probably right, and Charlotte's quality of life is poor, it should not be their decision to let her die, it should be her parents' decision, as she is not capable of making that decision herself.

My 83-year-old grandmother (I look after her instead of having a "real" job) is due to go into an NHS hospital soon to have treatment for leg problems. She is in terrible pain constantly, as she has had severe arthritis most of her life. in addition, she has many many other health problems. There are a lot of stories emerging lately about the lack of care the elderly get in NHS hospitals: they are pretty much ignored until they are in such a condition that the doctors feel it's approriate to put a DNR code on their notes. And the lack of beds mean that people are actually spending their last hours on mattresses on the floors of hospitals.

When Grandma gets admitted to hospital (something for which she has been waiting for four months, by the way - isn't socialised medicine wonderful?) I am going to impress upon the doctors treating her that if they dare mark her as DNR I will hunt them down and do very nasty things to them. Despite her constant pain, she wants to live (like Darren and Debbie Wyatt, she is a practising Christian and believes that it's not the doctors' place to decide when she dies, that that privilege belongs to her God). I'm rather scared that she won't get that option.

The very young and the very old, neither of whom are contributing, "useful" members of society (ie, they don't pay much in the way of taxes and are recipients of welfare) are both at terrible risk when they have to go to a NHS hospital.

I wish we could afford to go private.

Incidentally, I am very surprised Charlotte Wyatt hasn't already died of MRSA. It can surely only be a matter of time.

Lizzie brings a valid point... (Below threshold)

Lizzie brings a valid point to the table. In socialized medicine, what is there to prevent a doctor from writing off any of us, old or young?

I will also agree that the current medical system in the U.S. is broken. Socializing medicine will not fix the problem. It will merely transfer it to the government. We need to radically re-think medical funding, not just move the burden from point A to point B.

Regardless of what anyone thinks of medicine, I have to admit that Baby Charlotte is VERY impressive. This infant has a strong life force in her.

Hmmm.Actually doct... (Below threshold)


Actually doctors in the Netherlands are being encouraged to help individuals to commit suicide whether voluntarily or not. If you're clinically depressed your doctor may persuade you to end your life. If you have a sick infant born in the Netherlands then the doctor might euthanise the child without ever having consulted you. Or even tell you.

One fine doctor there admitted to euthanising several children in this way. The local law enforcement showed no interest in arresting or prosecuting this doctor.

Frankly all they need now is the ability to manufacture Soylent Green and they'd be all set.

i cant beilve that a court ... (Below threshold)

i cant beilve that a court can just deside rather or not an innocent childs life is worth saving... it sickness me to see what will come next..i am in the health field my self and that would be like me saying that i saw a wreck but did not feel that they were worthy enough too save them... every one deserves to live i have a child on the way and if any one refused her medical treatment there would be hell to pay i know that for sure.... she is an innocent child how would that judge like it when he steped down and got real sick they decided hes life wasnt worth saving....






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy