Help Save Baby Olivia - Dr's In UK Want To Stop Life Saving Treatment

[libertygrl]

I don't know if this was ever posted but I just discovered this news today. There are no words!! Please help if you can. Thank you.



Sadly Olivia might be left to die within days.
She s made so much progress in January but the universe is somehow against her : she caught an infection, she s got teething symptoms and some might interpret " look she s in pain , let s speed up her death" and at the same time some work really hard to prevent Olivia from having her parents by her side. We woun t be bullied into abandoning our lovely Olivia. We love her more than anything else



Published on Feb 12, 2015
Please support Olivia by donating at http://www.youcaring.com/medical-fun...s-voice/268810...

Olivia has fought so hard to get this far, she's beaten cancer, but NHS doctors have made the decision to withdraw treatment. Unless her family can raise the money to continue the treatment elsewhere, Olivia's future is uncertain.

Contact Oliva's parents to find out about other ways you can support at https://www.facebook.com/oliviasvoice

[Zippyjuan]

Olivia has fought so hard to get this far, she's beaten cancer, but NHS doctors have made the decision to withdraw treatment. Unless her family can raise the money to continue the treatment elsewhere, Olivia's future is uncertain.

This story raises the question of who should pay for medical services. National Health Insurance? Private insurance? The individual seeking treatment?

[acptulsa]

This story raises the question of who should pay for medical services. National Health Insurance? Private insurance? The individual seeking treatment?

Surely you're not serious? This is Great Britain--your place. Y'all thought you had settled that question some four decades ago.

This story only raises one question: No matter how tempting it might be to steal money from everyone so anyone who needs major medical treatment can get it, and no matter how noble the politicians make all that sound when they make their promises, is there a government on earth that can actually be trusted to keep such promises? Any government anywhere that will provide the unlimited, unconditional, unrationed care they promise when they talk you into shoveling billions into their gaping maws for health care?

Medical situations like this one pop up, people contribute, people say, there must be a better way, if we give the government this portion of our disposable income we reserve for this charity, then no one will ever lack, the government hands it out as no-bid contracts overpriced enough to cover all the kickbacks, it announces the budget won't stretch enough to cover the corruption and medical care too, and people who no longer have this much extra because they're giving it to the government must dig into money they don't have or this charity goes unfunded and children die.

There's a sucker born every minute.

[BuddyRey]

Is this common practice, for the NHS to just "dump" a patient once he or she has grown too costly or labor-intensive to treat? This goes against all the flowery promises made to me about muh free gub'ment health!

[Zippyjuan]

Reading through the history of the baby, her kidneys have not functioned for a long time (among other health issues). She has been on dialysis 24 hours a day. They tried to shut it down to see if her kidneys would function but still haven't. They said if this time she is unable to process her own fluids and produce urine, that it would not be worth it to continue. See the "Updates" section. http://www.youcaring.com/medical-fun...s-voice/268810 Should treatment continue if there is no hope of improvement? If so- who should pay for it? They are seeking nearly a $miillion ($800,000) to be able to continue the treatment.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

This story raises the question of who should pay for medical services. National Health Insurance? Private insurance? The individual seeking treatment?

You sound concerned. Have you donated?

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

If so- who should pay for it? They are seeking nearly a $miillion ($800,000) to be able to continue the treatment.

If people were not so wrapped up in taxing everybody else for their own benefit, then maybe people would be more willing to give. Seems like there'd be a lot more money freed up.

Saying to someone that you "should" donate and mandating taxes to do so is a losing proposition. You can't change somebody's heart by saying they should do something. You can't make somebody care, but that does not stop people from accusing voluntarists of being selfish. Tax advocates refuse to give from their own pocket, but mandate that others do so. They are the epitome of selfishness.

[Christian Liberty]

Reading through the history of the baby, her kidneys have not functioned for a long time (among other health issues). She has been on dialysis 24 hours a day. They tried to shut it down to see if her kidneys would function but still haven't. They said if this time she is unable to process her own fluids and produce urine, that it would not be worth it to continue. See the "Updates" section. http://www.youcaring.com/medical-fun...s-voice/268810 Should treatment continue if there is no hope of improvement? If so- who should pay for it? They are seeking nearly a $miillion ($800,000) to be able to continue the treatment.

This is one of the problems with "NHS", it basically forces human life to be an economic equation.

Mind you, maybe that's an unavoidable effect of human nature regardless. But at least on a voluntarist system people can choose for themselves what they want to put their money towards rather than government plundering everyone and using the stolen largesse to decide who should live and who should die. Perhaps this family would have been able to afford to treat their daughter were it not for the government plundering them and manipulating the medical industry? If that's so, the government is guilty of manslaughter at the least (which is admittedly pretty common)