Archie Battersebee case-thread 2

[whynotwhatknot]

ongoing from previous thread

www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4573803-archie-battersbee-case?page=40

I remember the case and the picture, around the same time a boy who had been in my year at school( we had left the year before ) also took ecstasy and died ,it terrified me and put me off experimenting with drugs .

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11054319/Archie-Battersbees-family-denied-permission-fight-United-Nations.html#comments-11054319

Googled and the daily mail have an explanation. If you complain to the UN re disability rights they may stay the order while investigating.
ECHR have found against previous cases so I guess less desirable?
I suspect Hollie is hoping for a miracle sign of hope and buying as much time as possible. It must be hard to understand some of the few stories of recovery against your child's prognosis especially with no medical insight

Ahe wants to prove she's this protective tigress of a Mother

There’s a lot of versions of what happened; with one interview they were out for dinner, another the cinema, on the BBC one she was out and found him at home, with another there was a rabbit in his bag and they were laughing, another there was a rabbit and she was cross, the most recent she thought he slipped over the rabbit on the landing and he wasn’t in the bag at all.

I mean, absolutely this is a trauma response, but I think also guilt that she couldn’t stop him/protect him. Now she has strangers telling her what a brave, strong mama she is and it’s helpful for her, and will be until the ventilator is stopped.

The 3min versus 40 ties into a post she made whereby she stated his down time was only 3min, and all the rest of Archie’s issues were secondary to malnutrition. (And she’s not well educated and I usually don’t pull up people ‘s spelling but she wrote “male nutrition”).

The down time is clearly 40 min at least and he really only survived because he was young and had such a healthy heart.

The problem, of course, is that if you deliberately obstruct blood flow to brain cells for such a long time, there is secondary swelling to the damaged and dying cells, with this process continuing even after the body is stabilised

Just read in the Guardian the extra 24 hours is because the father was in hospital for a day, so obviously couldn't focus on the case and next steps.

The parents don't want to go to the ECHR because of its previous decisions e.g Charlie Gard.

They want to go to the UN Convention on the Rights of Disabled People. No info about how they would go about doing that.

The thing is he's not disabled and it's insulting to people who are
He's dead
I feel so much for the staff by now

This sounds a bit like clutching at straws. I'm assuming you'd need to be alive to be disabled?

Yes, but as the tests that need to be done to diagnose brainstem death have not been able to be done, then the assertion that he is legally dead has been overturned. The reality, though, is pretty devastating.

At least I think it was overturned.

Well, if the UN were a possibility (and agreed he is not 'disabled') then I assume the Gard/Evan's etc families would have done it. And Archie's family and lawyers would have put in the application by now.

And when it comes down to it, the 'best interest' analysis would cover it, I would think (as someone who isn't a lawyer!)

I suspect that it is misinformation, but perhaps I am cynical.

Where was the Eamon Holmes interview?

tia

I grew up accross the road from a jahovah witness family. They converted one day when they come door knocking. Had two kids sopped celebrating birthdays and Christmas's etc.

About 20 year's ago she found out she had breast cancer and refused treatment. She died within 6 months. There's nothing that anyone can do or say to make me follow a religion. They no longer come door knocking here since covid. Instead they send hand written letters some have been written by a child. Goes straight in the bin. Or send a friend request on Facebook.

The amount of things I've read about us that just aren't true. We do not refuse treatment, we value life. Plenty of us have had multiple operations, transplants and chemo for cancer. Some people and not just JWs for whatever reason won't take treatment for cancer. I have known a few and its more down to a belief in natural remedies or even sadly because its terminal and chemo would just make them too sick to enjoy what time they have left. I've had 3 c.sections, 1 ectopic removed. I've have friends who have had chemo and radiotherapy for their cancer and some friends who sadly found out too late and no treatment available. So whatever happened to your poor neighbour isn't anything to do with her faith.

@WingingItSince1973 I totally agree that there is a lot of generalised advice about JW and blood products or treatments. However the trust I used to work for had a whole policy about it. It's really common for JW to completely refuse any blood products at all. Maybe @Somethingneedstochange neighbour refused blood transfusion or it was her choice but I've had to go on extra training because the trust I used to work for took a family to court because they refused blood products for their child with leukaemia; the trust won the court case and they administered the products.

www.dbth.nhs.uk/document/patt84/

So the dad accepted hospital treatment even though the narrative is that the doctors are trying to kill Archie? 🤔

I feel that ‘the army’ play such a negative part in these cases where parents are disagreeing with the medical professionals about withdrawing life support for their child. The parents and child end up suffering even more and the way the doctors and nurses are treated is horrific. I don’t know what the answer is but with the number of times this is happening now surely its time for an official enquiry/review to take place to see if any recommendations can be made to help.

I am a nurse and I was once involved in the care of a baby who was 7 months and although she was seriously ill and needed a liver transplant, as her parents were JW they refused to give consent for the procedure.

The Trust then went to Court over the issue and in the best interests of the child the transplant was performed against the parents wishes.

At the time I just couldn’t understand how the parents could sit at the cot side of their seriously ill baby and refuse treatment in the knowledge she would die without it.

Mind you, they would have known that ultimately the Trust would override their religious beliefs.

After the decision had been made, the parents almost seemed relieved as they knew their daughter’s life would be saved but they also knew that they had stayed true to their beliefs by having refused her treatment in the first place.

It was a really strange case to be in and it’s never left me.

@Perplexed0522 we had a JW child who needed major spinal surgery. That also can't really be fine without blood. Loads of preparations were done to avoid it. And a court order was gained to give if it if necessary. Mum was also told in no uncertain terms that the surgeons would not let her son die, for want of a blood transfusion.
They managed to avoid it, but his recovery was prolonged due to low Hb, requiring iron infusions. There was a JW liaison committee who visited very frequently, and we all felt they were checking up on us and mum to some extent. It was a bit much.

If a JW family allow such treatments they are excommunicated from their church family. If it is forced on them, they remain in the family. The power of community is strong.

These cases such as Archie's happen up and down the country. We don't normally hear about them because the family accept the advice of doctors and follow their guidance. We're seeing the fallout of mistrust and the gathering of people who really don't understand but are united in their mistrust of medical advice.

The is the one I’ve seen can be found via googling ‘Hollie Dance most recent interviews’ comes up as being from yesterday on GBNews on YouTube but, for some reason, the link isn’t copying. It’s just over 6 1/2 minutes long and was the first video that came up on the search

it was found on the dignity for all page

I think it's also the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which was cited in the judgment. But I wonder whether the UN has any rights to get involved in an individual case which has gone right through a country's courts, particularly when the ECHR is available.

I had an aunt who was a JW.

My mum once had quite a discussion with her about blood transfusion and how she could possibly deny treatment to her children. And her response was “well, if that happens then the court would get involved.” Talk about a cop-out.

Personally I think that anyone who denied treatment to their children on the basis of whatever grounds they saw fit should have their children taken into care as anyone who would allow their child to die is an unfit parent.

The posts about barricading A’s room etc have started…

And leech therapy 🙄 Yeah because that will regenerate his brain...

Jeez these people are batshit!

I have been following this story with total disbelief on a number of forums Such a tragedy - that poor little chap. This case is no longer about him and his rights. Just let him go

presumably they will be prevented from even entering the hospital. And if they don’t step away from this mob, so will the parents.

Is A in a side room at least so that other families don’t have to witness this horror?