"Alfie's Army" and long term implications

[Andromeida59]

I think that there has been so much scaremongering around the hospital and expertise of the medical professionals that I genuinely feel that this will put some of from having their children treated because of the mass hysteria created around this case.

I have been gobsmacked by so much that I've seen around the Alfie Evans case. Personally, I don't think I've ever seen such rabid paranoia and conspiracy theories (lethal injections, Big Pharma, organs for cash etc.). I'm also trying to understand the mentality behind "Alfie's Army". I think what started off as well intentioned "thoughts and prayers" etc. has now escalated in to something that even the family will not be able to control. I also think it's only a matter of time before the "Army" turn on the father.

I do think that hospitals make mistakes and of course medical professionals will not always be right but there seems to have been an escalation in animosity since the Charlie Gard case. I think that next time a case of this type occurs, the outcome could be far worse because who would have imagined we would have seen protesters attempting to "storm" a children's hospital?

Also, really don't understand the "the child belongs to the parents ergo it's up to the parents to do what they want" attitude. I'm not a parent (and I don't think being a parent suddenly endows parents with a wealth of medical and legal knowledge) but surely people understand that children do not "belong" to them?

Actually nobody with any money would have any sense if they let their family be treated by the NHS full stop.

I recently had a hand injury that was potentially serious as it involved my right hand. After initially being dealt with at a drop-in centre, I was seen very quickly at a specialist hand clinic, and after a number of follow-up appointments and some physiotherapy it's all sorted. I never had to wait more than 5 minutes for any appointment, and got text reminders beforehand. And, of course, I paid not one penny.

Mightymucks, why did allowing myself to be treated by the NHS indicate that I have no sense? Precisely what advantage would there have been in going privately or going abroad?

I agree Gnother the NHS is great but sometimes things go wrong.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2293567/This-brilliant-surgeon-work-NHS-Is-blew-whistle-child-deaths-leading-hospital.html

Mightymucks, why did allowing myself to be treated by the NHS indicate that I have no sense? Precisely what advantage would there have been in going privately or going abroad?

Because if you go to a European hospital you have a far higher chance of a better outcome. You may have had a good outcome, but as soon as you engaged with the NHS your chances of a good outcome were dramatically reduced. For every person who has a good outcome there are people who have bad outcomes, and there are far more people with bad outcomes from the NHS than there are for European health services.

Put it this way, if you had an illness, and you had a choice between a 40% or 60% chance of recovery which would you choose?

A 60% chance of course, it’s a no brainer. Yet somebody who had the money and resources to choose going for NHS care instead of European care would be reducing their chances of a full recovery by similar amounts for many conditions and by at least some amount for most conditions.

So, yes. People with the money and resources to go elsewhere when we know better care and outcomes are available would be absolutely moronic to choose the NHS with its poor record. It’s not rocket science. It’s just simple logic that nobody who had a genuine choice would choose the NHS when there are far, far superior services available.

And these services are available just across the channel in universal health systems.

The table in this report suggests the NHS does well in international rankings www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2014/jun/mirror-mirror

I often link to that Commonwealth Fund ranking.

It does illustrate that for a nation, for a whole people, the NHS does a very good job in international comparison; whether it is always the best option for individuals is a whole other question.

IMO the biggest danger of top of the range, Gold Standard private medicine is that, inevitably, due to market forces, the patient becomes more of a client or customer, and as the 'customer is always right' over investigation and over treatment, in fact also unnecessary treatment, is the consequence. Numbers about the dangers of Too Much Medicine are much harder to find and some outcomes are impossible to quantify.

I couldn't conceivably have had a chance of a better outcome in a European hospital, Mightymucks, given that (a) they wouldn't have offered anything different and (b) it would inevitably have involved delay which in itself would have been dangerous.

Very interesting article here:
www.the-pool.com/news-views/opinion/2018/18/frances-ryan-on-alfie-evans-and-dangers-of-public-campaign