Archie Battersebee case-thread 2

[whynotwhatknot]

ongoing from previous thread

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

That event thought would not AFAIK set any legal precedent.

We just need to wait for the judge to come back.

The potential effect in relation to accepted medical practice the world over, to say nothing of the effect on things like abortion rights, is precisely why the UN is highly unlikely even to want to get involved in this. It would be better if they said so now.

I’m assuming it’s just a rubber stamp to say the court has reviewed and legal stance of previous judges still applies. Surely they know nothing will change and they are just prolonging their own suffering now. I really worry for the poor staff tomorrow and what sort of disruption the Facebook crazies might cause the hospital.

The best they can do is say that they managed to get it postponed. That isn't a win.

I fear that meme may indicate that Hollie is daft enough to barricade the door, knowing full well that it may precipitate Archie's "death", but taking the view that at least that way she can say he died naturally and defeated the hospital's evil plans.

So she's actually faked that video?

If so it really does show how desperate she is - I feel for Dance more and more as the days go on.

I think she's trying to fight a guilt she feels - which she shouldn't feel in the first place.

I think (hope!) the CLC are reaching the end of their options on this topic.

They decided not to bother going to the ECHR this time, following the Gard and Evans decisions.

The high levels of PR and distorted, emotive language over these cases hasn't created a groundswell of support for their cause.

The UN application is clutching at straws and empty PR.

There is nowhere left to go with the next case.

What are Archie’s dads views on this? Does he have strong views? Is he going along with it all because he can see how distressed Hollie is? There’s very little I’ve heard about him and his personal views.

So she's actually faked that video ?

The narration on the video is a string "deep breath in , hold it , deep breath out" voice ( probably not exactly those words but you get the idea)
And the sound of the ventilator

Hollie claimed there was a monitor which showed when he was taking a breath of his own volition , but the mediacal staff removed this monitor of course that happened

Probably to stop her "Oh look Arch is breathing do something" and someone explaining that no , what is showing is the machine working and monitoring his O2 and CO2 levels
She said it was "twice" so - 2 breathes ? 2 minutes of breath?
Who knows ?
She was in an interview with her friend and said You saw his breathe , friend went yeah very non commital (but shes nnot going to say on TV Nope never saw that

If she's so certain he's breathing, she should allow the machine breathing for him to be switched off.

Is anyone going to start a new thread before this one fills up?

No, to be fair, she didn't fake it. She made it clear that she was using an app or something to try to get him to breathe, and she didn't try to say that the breathing sounds were his spontaneous breaths. I think she was relying on the traces on screen.

It was only on a couple of isolated episodes (that she claimed this happened )
The video didn't seem to make much impact in court either ( probably thrown out by actual medical evidence )

From the hand grip , to the eyes looking at his teddy bear to some other shite about his drooling at a cake

He's on so much medication (that she wants removed ) that his whole body is in a fragile balance . He wouldn't be able to breathe unaided (what with him being dead )

www.stammeringlaw.org.uk/disability-equality-law/european-union-human-rights-un/cprd/ This was an interesting read.

@Lougle yes indeed. And it links to this, which is the actual protocol under which they've applied to the UN: www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/optional-protocol-convention-rights-persons-disabilities

Article 4 is interesting. "the Committee may transmit to the State Party concerned for its urgent consideration a request..."

Not an injunction, then.

Sorry wrong thread! Have asked for removal

As much as I think this should go ahead tomorrow, it’s probably good that a judge casts an eye over it and the hospital isn’t unilaterally ignoring the request

No, to be fair, she didn't fake it. She made it clear that she was using an app or something to try to get him to breathe, and she didn't try to say that the breathing sounds were his spontaneous breaths. I think she was relying on the traces on screen.

Ahhhh thanks. Now I get it. So the voice and breathing sounds are an app and she's recording Archie's monitor.

The more I read about this complex case the more I feel for Dance.

There's a video now , just an arm on a bed and a pair of hands (presume Hollie's) stroking the hand and arm, while a prayer is being said .

It looks very calm and hopefully tomorrow will be the same calm and quiet atmosphere , but not videoed for all to see.
Hopefully she will keep this last scrap of dignity and keep this private and without trauma for Archies sake
There will be time for pub;ic outpouring of grief when they bury or cremate him

The high levels of PR and distorted, emotive language over these cases hasn't created a groundswell of support for their cause

I think this is important.

i dont really like the government getting involved doesnt that set a precedent that any ruling you dont like you can ask the government to intervene?

this was the family asking them not the hospital

A court has declared that continuing the treatment would not be lawful and I don’t think the government can overrule that. I wouldn’t be surprised if the court gives a bit more time tomorrow for the UN to look into things though.

It's not the Government, as in the Politicians, who have got involved. The Government Legal Department, which is the part of the Civil Service tasked with providing legal advice to Government, has referred the matter of the UN's intervention to the High Court.

Given it is one of, if not the first, withdrawal of life support case where the UN has intervened, I would fully expect the GLS to look to the High Court for judgement on whether that intervention has any impact - otherwise it would be the Government or Civil Service and not the independent judiciary that was making that decision.

sound like Hollie is preparing to baptise Archie so is maybe close to acceptance