Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

Alfie Evans 7

926 replies

StayingAtTamaras · 26/04/2018 23:25

Continue here

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
BuntyII · 27/04/2018 12:02

I also think MN have taken the censorship on this far far too far incidentally.

^
I don't. I'm glad someone is here to remind posters that we are talking about the father of a dying child. And to stop the thread becoming nothing more than an anti AA campaign.

SilverySurfer · 27/04/2018 12:04

I think that's definitely the case on threads about Madeleine McCann, for example, LimonViola. MNHQ come down hard on the slightest hint of criticism of the MM parents, who are know to be litigious, so could well be the case here.

user838383 · 27/04/2018 12:04

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

whywhywhywhywhyyy · 27/04/2018 12:11

Steven Woolfe is disgusting. He's capitalising on this for votes.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 27/04/2018 12:17

I obviously can't comment on whether HQ are concerned about legal action, but what's been released for our consumption is that they're "uncomfortable" around what seems anything except fawning backing of TE on a parenting site ... apparently it's considered "not in the spirit"

I confess it's difficult to see how that same "spirit" allows cruel remarks about massively dedicated staff who've been widely praised by those in a position to know - but then, it's not my site to decide about

namechange2222 · 27/04/2018 12:17

My immediate thoughts yesterday were that now that Tom is appearing to tow the line, Alfie may be 'allowed' home
So do I take it that, if this is the case, should he have not 'towed the line' Alfie would remain in hospital?
Alfie is either safe enough to go somewhere with his parents or not surely? Should it really boil down to if the 'Army' are called off?

Panda81 · 27/04/2018 12:18

So can a company, like MN, be sued for what others have written on their site? Even though it's not MN that have written it?

MynameisJune · 27/04/2018 12:24

@panda in short yes, after MM I’m sure HQ are just being cautious.

SilverySurfer · 27/04/2018 12:24

I don't know Panda a good question, but if not I wonder if they could be legally forced to hand over the poster in question's RL details so that action could be taken against the individual?

whywhywhywhywhyyy · 27/04/2018 12:25

Namechange222 If staff safety is a reason why Alfie can't go home with medical support from AH, calling off the army is important

PivotPivotPIVOTTT · 27/04/2018 12:27

raisedbyguineapivs I was reading about the Charlie Gard case yesterday and read that he couldn't be taken home because the life support equipment wouldn't have fitted through the front door so that was why he was taken to a hospice instead.

This is probably going to sound really stupid but I was wondering if they do get Alfie home is there a chance they could end up trying to put him back on a ventilator? After the apparent doctor turning up at AH a couple of days ago with a ventilator in a suitcase then what's stopping them contacting him to bring it to their home? Would a ventilator that you can stick in a suitcase even be up to the standards of what he was on before?

Allington · 27/04/2018 12:31

TE has talked about 'building bridges' - hopefully he has now realised he needs to compromise and minimise conflict if he is going to influence where AE spends his last days.

I hope everyone involved can find a way of keeping AE safe from unnecessary interventions while giving his parents the least stressful environment to spend time with him.

Elliss2018 · 27/04/2018 12:32

@PaintedHorizons I'm so glad that you were looked after as well as your child. I'm a nurse and I always think about the patients family and how they're feeling.

Sozzler · 27/04/2018 12:51

Until now I have avoided adding my opinion on these threads because I don't want to get drawn into a debate on such a sad situation. I have witnessed these threads descending into bickering at times and didn't want to become a part of that. However, I do feel alternative perspectives are valuable so thought that now the threads have mellowed a little I would share my thoughts.
Firstly, I do feel there has been a strong consensus on these threads that anyone disagreeing with courts decisions can't have Alfie's best interests at heart. But, this is actually the crux of the argument, there is a difference in what people believe these best interests to be. Britain isn't the only country that legislates for the best interests of the child, but we do seem to have a different perspective and way of enacting it in these cases compared to some other European countries. It's a hugely complex ethical area and so I do think it is rather simplistic to believe Britain is always completely right in these situations and that processes that measure best interests differently are not.
I am aware of the court judgements and that these have given Alfie a dire prognosis but given that medical fact has been defied on numerous occasions before, who can really blame the family from clinging to the hope that this could be the case for Alfie, especially given that he hasn't received a specific diagnosis. My understanding is that Alfies parents wanted him to go to Italy in order to have a fresh medical perspective on his condition with the hope of a diagnosis rather than just alternative palliative care. As unrealistic as I know this is, I think I would feel exactly the same because I would not want to leave any stone un-turned before letting go of my child.
Although I certainly don't condone the behaviour expressed by some in Alfie's Army, I disagree with the criticism levelled at the family for using social media to gain support for Alfie's case. I can't even begin to imagine the powerlessness a parent must feel in this situation. To be forced to end your child's life when you truly believe they should live is unimaginably horrific and brutal and I believe Alfie's Army has been a way for them to regain some sort of power and control in this situation. Again, who can really blame them.
It's all just so terribly sad and I really hope that Alfie is comfortable and his parents are getting to spend some loving and peaceful time with him.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 27/04/2018 12:52

I understand there will be no further updates re Alfie and that is in his best interest

But there already have been further updates; an "admin" posted about Alfie's condition this morning and only last night TE's brother took it upon himself to suggest that the commitment not to approach the media "will be until something changes with the hospital but we hope and pray it doesnt"

derxa · 27/04/2018 12:58

It's a hugely complex ethical area and so I do think it is rather simplistic to believe Britain is always completely right in these situations and that processes that measure best interests differently are not. Yes I agree. People are by their nature not infallible and law makers and judges do not get it right every time. Anyway all that is water under the bridge as far as Alfie is concerned. I wish him and his family all the best.

fenneltea · 27/04/2018 13:09

I do think that when several medical experts have come to the same conclusion then we have to listen however; you can't refute the medical evidence of the scans unfortuately. If it was a case of there being a possibility that the prognosis was wrong I'd agree, but I think the evidence is irrefutable.

reallyanotherone · 27/04/2018 13:11

*I also think MN have taken the censorship on this far far too far incidentally.

^
I don't. I'm glad someone is here to remind posters that we are talking about the father of a dying child. And to stop the thread becoming nothing more than an anti AA campaign*

I was deleted and as far as i remember i didn’t mention the case, te, oe speculate on alfie at all.

I responded to a comment on why aa may behave like it does. Why people may be so ready to believe awful things of alderhey and GOSH.

So i am no longer sure what is and isn’t allowed. If we can’t refer to aa, te, alfie, the case, cg, what are we allowed to discuss?

Allington · 27/04/2018 13:34

I do think that when several medical experts have come to the same conclusion then we have to listen however; you can't refute the medical evidence of the scans unfortunately. If it was a case of there being a possibility that the prognosis was wrong I'd agree, but I think the evidence is irrefutable

When the parents' own experts agree with the hospital clinicians I think you have to accept that the prognosis is probably correct. The Italian hospital is not claiming to be able to cure or even improve his condition at all - they would give him a different type of palliative care for a short while. That's all.

fenneltea · 27/04/2018 13:38

Yes, Allington, which I think most people would agree would be for the parents benefit rather than Alfie's, at the core of this it has to be what benefits Alfie.

SilverySurfer · 27/04/2018 13:41

reallyanotherone
So i am no longer sure what is and isn’t allowed. If we can’t refer to aa, te, alfie, the case, cg, what are we allowed to discuss?

A good question - I think we have to play it by ear and hope we don't overstep the mark.

Quite honestly I don't understand why we can't be critical of the AA, some of whom have incited hatred and violence towards AH and delayed parents with ill children from quickly gaining access to the hospital. Not to mention countering their absurd suggestions for 'cures' when there is patently no cure.

Likewise, I don't recall anyone being critical of TE, but should we not be allowed to say that it's obvious he is in a deeply emotional state and some of his words/actions, no doubt supplied by those who seemingly serve him albeit badly, were not good for him or Alfie or AH. Is that a terrible thing to say. I don't think so but no doubt this post will be deleted if MNHQ think otherwise.

MadameGrizzly · 27/04/2018 13:51

I wonder if they could be legally forced to hand over the poster in question's RL details so that action could be taken against the individual?

I think that yes, this sort of information can be subpoenaed from forums and ISPs.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 27/04/2018 14:05

I wonder if they could be legally forced to hand over the poster in question's RL details so that action could be taken

I recall a thread about a dubious character who apparently told the police that MNers were committing "hate crimes" against him. MNHQ posted to say that details had been requested by the police and that they'd agreed to take down the thread instead, in order to close the issue down

I'm no lawyer, but if all that was as reported, it appears the answer to your question is yes

PaintedHorizons · 27/04/2018 14:28

Elliss2018
I'm a nurse and I always think about the patients family and how they're feeling.

  • and I am sure that means so much more to people than you sometimes even realise. I still remember that nurse 14 years later. Her kindness made me cry - and I was absolutely on my own at that time. (And she made a good cup of tea!)
fenneltea · 27/04/2018 14:40

DE has just confirmed that TE has no intention of taking Alfie home 'to die' - to get him home is their priority. I think there is no chance of acceptance of the situation.