Charlie Gard Case 4

[LovelyBath77]

A new thread to follow on from the others about this case

would please ask people to refrain from posting anything about the funds that have been raised and continue to be raised.

Are you serious?!

People are perfectly entitled to comment on how much money has been raised and how.

This is not North Korea.

Come on lapin, are you cool with the fact that the parents and their supporters are encouraging people to put money direct in to their bank account?

@shatners because the posters are questioning the motives behind the fundraising and making very hurtful insinuations and assumptions

I am speechless at the merchandising. This unfortunate case has turned into the worst media circus to date.

I am watching that ShatnersWig, disgusting. Alfie hasn't even reached his target and they just posted to see if anyone would donate.
Wouldn't it have been a nice gesture to make the £900 up from the two million of the other fund?
Instead, apparently, the family asked for the post to be removed.

Because their whole arguement is based on popularity - people have donated X amount to US so WE should be able to decide
WE have X number of supporters, so we should get what we want

The problem with the popularity model of healthcare is that it doesn't work if everyone is getting equal attention

LapinR0se I would agree if people were commenting on Charlie's fund for treatment.

However the £1.2m total needed was raised long ago.
The USA have offered to give the treatment free of charge now.

I think people are just wondering now- when there is £2million at their instant disposal, why there is the need for a merchandise shop.

Someone said above (sorry I can't find it now) i don't think they need people's direct debits or hampers of clothes.

Well they certainly aren't refusing them.

I haven't looked at the CA facebook page, but felt curious and had a look at the Great Ormond Street Hospital and Charity facebook page, where they had posted a statement about CG. Christ. The barmy army have come out in full force, commenting and spreading their ignorance and delusions...over 600 comments, many in support of GOSH but very many not.
Some of the comments read like this: 'my son was diagnosed wiv a grade 3 brain tumour at 7 months old got told by GOSH only a 5 % chance the chemo would do anything for my son and basically there was no hope, I went ahead and said I want him to even have chemo knowing I got told he wouldn't even reach his 1st birthday, I'm glad I did what I did cos my son turns 15 this yr'

And this about the hcp's at GOSH
'You are uncompassionate and self-absorbed. You are a disgrace to the profession. No wonder people parents "kidnap" their kids and take them overseas for treatment ... which works.'

FFS

You aren't mad @RMC123. I posted about that down thread somewhere. Whoever is running that page clearly has NFI about the comments made in the courtroom yesterday where the Gards' lawyer denied that the 10% claim and from them

I don't think it's ideal but I have absolutely no visibility of where that money is going and what it's being used for, and I don't want to leap to any conclusions.

I like this thread as it is a largely fact-based and rational discussion that provides a much-needed antidote to the (public and media) hysteria that surrounds the case.

These kinds of claims and assumptions about the funds are as bad as the sorts of things CA are saying about GOSH in my opinion. Unfounded vitriol.

You can ask all you like Lapin, but I'll feel free to ignore you. Don't try to shut down discussion here. This is not the Facebook CA thickos you're talking to.

They could use the 2 mil to start up a Health based hybrid of crowdfunding and instagram

Where whoever's post gets most sympathy hearts gets the widest choice of healthcare options

This is afterall what they are advocating!

Lapin. I don't find any of the comments surrounding the fundraising as distasteful as calling GOSH staff murderers, killers, murderous scum or suggesting a bazooka used on GOSH, that GOSH is evil and should be closed down, that GOSH supporters are cunts, that the judge has taken backhanders, that the guardian's barrister is a witch.... Need I continue?

storify.com/han_kirk/dax-s-tale

I was on those mumsnet threads which were policed and then removed due to objections about it being 'distasteful'.

I was one of the people who contacted RM house to find out if they got the money.

They did not get that amount raised, they got a 'token' donation after a big media expose.

I am in no way suggesting that this is a similar situation, I understand that the fund will go to charity, not sure about the private account donations but that is for living expenses. It's expensive having a sick child and extra money is needed.

I really object to some areas being 'out of bounds' and told what we can and can't discuss.

Same with Camilla B threads.

Theweewitch thank you! Sorry to have posted about it twice , have been trying to keep up with this thread but it moves so fast!

Well I have no idea what that's money is being used for either. It is not needed for his treatment. It is not needed for legal fees as it was reported their legal team acted pro bono. So what benefit will the child be getting from that money and why are they still collecting it?

@WannaBe your post at 17:40:45 is horrible. You don't have to sympathise but you should refrain from making the sorts of accusations and suggestions you have there. Fine to disagree, fine to criticise, but no need to behave like that. Swap out the targets of your anger and that post would fit right in on the CA facebook page.

They really do want him to be a guinea pig

Yes well mumsnet will close this thread down too if you don't stop, and then all the good discussion will be lost.

The reason given why people have been asked to pay directly into Connie's account is to maximise the donations as just giving etc take a percentage.

There is no reason to assume there is anything underhand going on here.

I'm not suggesting it's wise (for example it does not take into account the tax expedition gift aid provides, so they are likely to lose as much as they gain) and I worry that aside from everything else the parents will have a huge financial/tax mess to sort out. That assumes people don't ask for donations to be returned if they are not used for the means they were raised, in which the financial mess could be worse.

As to why not stop funding - well because they have never given up.

The donations should and will come under scrutiny from HMRC at some point, but making an assumption "it's all about the money" is a step to far for me I'm afraid and quite unpleasant.

Where has that 10% figure come from? Their lawyer will be tearing his hair out. That is, if he's still acting for them.

Lapin.

I understand what you are saying, but I reserve the right to rebut.

The money should never have been an issue ever. But it is now north of 2million. For what?

No one likes to think that the mob, the US nutters (sorry) or the family will benefit from fundraising if it is personally beneficial.

Is it, will it be? Who knows. When someone tells me this I will be delighted to know.

I don't understand the donations to a personal bank account either. But maybe that's just me.

I think you may be a bit naive. Money talks and bullshit walks.

Agree, distasteful is how I would describe putting your personal bank details up on the internet.
Let's remember that MN is here for us all to have opinions within the limits of respect and it wouldn't be normal I suppose if we all agreed on everything but the general feel here is for Charlie having dignity where the barmy army are all about parents "rights" so there already is a massive divide in opinion.

Not many would disagree that these latest actions are tasteful, there are other ways to help, apparently all decisions made on CA have to be approved by the family.

I have a hypothetical question, if someone knows the answer?

If someone raises a million pounds and says "I'm going to donate it to the X fund for X disease" is there ever any proof that they did donate it?

I mean, can you request to find out through the freedom of information act, or is it confidential?

If you asked a Charity directly, "Did John Jackson donate the million pounds they said they were going to?" would they tell you no if they hadn't?

Meant I agreed with a pp who disagrees with Lapin.

I think that's a very good question @LogicalPsycho and I don't know the answer.

As I said I think we need to be careful about posting about finances - not that reasonable questions can't be asked.