Archie Battersbee - Thread 4

[BreadInCaptivity]

Previous thread:

Archie Battersbee - Thread 3 http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/inthee_news/4601962-archie-battersbee-thread-3

I don't see that they have much choice. Frankly, this is a 'they go low, we go high' situation - they have to do everything they can both to BE compassionate and to BE SEEN to be compassionate. They can't be the unreasonable party at any point. It puts them in a real bind, because adequate notice for his family to gather and say goodbye is also adequate notice for them to launch another pointless, specious appeal, but I don't see that they can just say 'We're switching his life support off in two hours, whether you're there or not' without bringing all sorts of further hell down on themselves. It must be exhausting for the hospital staff, medical and administrative alike (I know I wouldn't want to be one of their lawyers right now).

Cross posted!

It just looks like a massive Fuck You to the legal system now. The CLC are just playing with them.

They are, but they’re achieving what they set out to achieve, just not quite how they hoped to achieve it.

Their goal was to stop life support being withdrawn, and they’ve done that. Because even though legally life support is to be withdrawn they have challenged that on every turn meaning that the law in this instance has been meaningless.

So it’s still a win for the CLC.

@ParasiticMicrowasp many hcp will be involved, physios, admin, support staff and will saddened and distressed. As pp mentioned - you can’t shut these emotions away. Some are probably fearful, intimidated.

I’m so sorry for the pain the family are in, the situation is intolerable for the nhs team too.

adequate notice for his family to gather and say goodbye is also adequate notice for them to launch another pointless, specious appeal

This hits the nail on the head.

It just looks like a massive Fuck You to the legal system now. The CLC are just playing with them

Exactly. I think the Court of Appeal is running out of patience based on its most recent judgment - not with the family as such but the very obvious attempts to frustrate a dignified end for Archie and end this invasive treatment of him.

Wanting to go to the ECHR now when a stay was given specifically for this purpose after the refusal of permission to appeal and they chose not to is really taking the piss. They aren’t interested in that as a a viable route of appeal, they are just trying to delay things. Highly contrary to Archie’s interests, as the Court of Appeal made clear.

@EasterIssland - no need to do that at all. Just watch the thread.

I really feel for this poor boy's family, but he's not going to come back from this injury and the people supporting his mother are giving her false hope.

I wonder if the parents who have gone through this previously look back and wish they had just spent the time peacefully saying goodbye to their child instead of stoking anger and denial. I don't deny it must be hard but Archie is going to die soon and no amount of rage is going to stop that.

I would hope not. As much as I think this case is spurious, I would hope they will, albeit urgently, look at the case on its merits.

Forgive my ignorance, but what is the difference between this case and, say, Tony Bland? Tony Bland was kept alive for years in a vegetative coma (apologies if those aren't the right words).

I'm with the hospital on this one, although feel desperately sorry for the parents, but am trying to understand why some people are kept on life support despite no hope of recovery, and others aren't.

Forgive my ignorance, but what is the difference between this case and, say, Tony Bland? Tony Bland was kept alive for years in a vegetative coma (apologies if those aren't the right words).

I'm with the hospital on this one, although feel desperately sorry for the parents, but am trying to understand why some people are kept on life support despite no hope of recovery, and others aren't.

Essentially he died when he hanged himself from the bannisters. Hollie’s rage subsequently is externalised grief.

I wonder that too Apollo, but I also see big differences in the cases. I can imagine that CG's parents don't regret a thing but maybe I'm wrong. I felt pretty much the same about the situation but at least there were some points in the history which were arguable. I do remember the hysteria ramping up hugely when the orange American president casually stuck his beak in for his own benefit and i do not forgive him for that.

This case is terrifying in every aspect for the way it's being used by CLC at Archie and his family's expense, for absolutely nothing but pain for all involved.

Link to the Bel Mooney article mentioned above - www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-11074339/BEL-MOONEY-shoes-wouldnt-parent-fight-like-Archie-Battersbees-mother.html#comments

Tony Bland was in a vegetative state - he woke and slept, opened and closed his eyes and reacted to some things. He wasn't brain dead although his quality of life was greatly diminished.

CG father was on radio 2 a few months ago - he remains very angry. They had to cut him off. He believes the parents should make all decisions.

CG mum and HD have similarities in their personality imo. It’s interesting - am sure there’s research around anger/ mistrust in HCP and underlying factors.

The urgency is to Archie. As matters stand the Trust has a court order saying it is inimical to his best interests to continue to be ventilated. Issues concerning a child's life go to the top of the waiting list.

Tony Bland was in a persistent vegetative state. His brain stem was in tact but there was little response. He was fed through a tube and eventually the decision was taken to remove the feeding tube, but this in itself had to go through legal avenues because of previous cases where doctors had agreed to withhold treatment from e.g. disabled patients who would have survived but were left to die.

In Archie’s case he is brain stem dead. There is no life. Tony bland was, IIRC, breathing independently, whereas Archie is not.

There’s a difference between removing a feeding tube and removing life support.

I do want to ask people who say parents' decisions come first whether that applies to all the parents in abuse cases.

What a terrible thing to say! This is a mother who’s desperately trying to hold on to her child. As a State, we should allow her the means to exhaust all legal avenues regardless of how we feel about the issue. It cannot be a luxury that only wealthy people can afford!

The Charlie Gard case was complicated.

I actually read up on it this morning because I couldn’t remember all the details, and it’s worth noting that GOSH were very much on board with the parents as much as they could be, but that when the initial conference was scheduled Charlie suffered multiple seizures and so the initial treatment plan could not be followed.

Also, the dr in America who had said that he would provide treatment was supposed to see him in January but didn’t actually do so until July when it was too late.

Also, CG was moved to a hospice at the end of his life, and he died less than 24 hours after his life support was removed.

I also read that his parents have recently had another baby.

Can someone tell me what to Google to understand the references to his mum's past/personality type? I only get the current sad situation.

I'm aware we can't discuss it here, or put links, or spell it out.

It's so distressing. I've managed to stay away from it so far, but as it continues I've got drawn in again at my better judgement.

Desperately sad.

It was sad in April when Archie was found unresponsive with little to no brain activity, it was sad at the end of may when he was declared medically deceased, it was sad knowing the intensive and invasive treatments to keep his fragile body going, however it’s now cruel to keep this boy artificially stimulated enough where his body is being ravaged minute by minute and wasting away just so the family can have more ‘time’. I could never keep someone’s body in pain for my own sake, especially my own children’s.

As awful as it is I think it’s easier for the family to be angry at medical professionals and the justice system than it is to be at the person who’s care he was meant to be in on that fatal day or the fact their boy passed away, it’s a misdirected way to cope and a very unfair way to process grief.

Tony Bland wasn't clinically dead. He still had brain stem function.

As I understand it the case of Tony Bland was a big part of the evolution of law and practice which has had to happen as we've got better at maintaining people on different forms of life support. It's fair that a lot of unspoken assumptions and old practice should get brought into the light and challenged.

My view of what 'quality of life' means is important for my own life but I can see the concern of people's individual visceral feelings about their own life affecting others that they care for.

I think the team skills used to keep this child's current state stable are absolutely extraordinary BTW.