Archie Battersbee thread 5

[henryhihat]

New thread...

How can you execute a dead body?

. This thread will probably be pulled, but if there is another general thread where posters can discuss these matters, I would like to take part. I don’t see why it should be. There are some deletions, but on the whole these threads have been measured and civilised.

If MN pull the thread they are essentially saying that we are not allowed a measured discussion of the case, and are then essentially giving the CLC credibility.

I understand your logic, but the whole case has been about Archie's best interests and moving him simply isn't according to the statement from the hospital. His stability is compromised by moving him within the confines of his bed.

So theoretically any decision to do this would put the hospital at risk of breaching the order unless the courts specifically allow them to do so - and there is no reason I can see why they would, even if the family took full responsibility for the risk.

He has but Paul has been quite quiet during all of this. Hollie seems to be the driving force

Yeah , most likely Hollie would be the one to give consent as she's is Res Parent .

There's loads of posts (on other sites) about "letting Archie live on in other people" , but her concern is her son, not other people and if she had consented at the relevant time , he would be properly dead .

But the bottom line is there absolutely no need to move him to a hospice.

Dance is now talking about "dignity" having afforded him none so far. He is in a private room- there is no reason why the disconnecting of the life support can't happen in that room , with his family there. There is no benefit or need to remove him to a hospice. What is she expecting to get out of moving him to a hospice- other than creating more drama?

Sorry but my patience and sympathy for her has evaporated.

Or not give consent , as the case may be

I don't understand what if anything the court can do to pre-empt this. For example, today could the courts say no to a hospice and that also includes any other option to move him out of hospital or vary from the withdrawal procedures the hospital have already provided to you. I wonder if they could issue a specific order to remove the life support with immediate effect, so no more deadlines.

Maybe it would need a Court Order and the Court making all the arrangements to have him transferred and then the responsibility is taken away from the hospital who could just refuse to be involved. What a dreadful situation for everyone concerned and an insult to the staff who work tirelessly to care for him and all the other patients needing expert care.

How can you execute a dead body ?

Hollie does not believe Archie is dead

They can’t be. No one can consent on behalf on another person, even a child. They can only act in their best interests. Even (especially) a child. So if the medical team and family can’t agree what that is (and the teams work hard with the families) a court hears everyone’s evidence and decides what is in the child’s best interest, and orders it (it’s invariably what the medics said)

It’s exactly what’s supposed to happen in a fair and just society. The layman has recourse against the medics and can even appeal against the courts (up to a point). Every so often cases are tested, like this one, and everything is generally seen to be working as it should be. BUT it is partly because cases can be tested like this that medics remain accountable and professional - the possibility of scrutiny keeps us honest!

Streamline the process (which isn’t used very often) and you open the system up to abuse. There are no lessons to learn. There are no improvements to be made. Nothing can be prevented without removing pivotal rights of consent, parental responsibility and the fabric of the justice system. It’s an unfortunate fact that sometimes the systems are tested to their very limits (in this case by an incredibly ill willed misogynistic organisation despicably exploiting very vulnerable people) but it does show they work.

I recall Alfie Evans Dad attempted mouth to mouth after Alfie was extubated

She's a desperate women ,and whilst i don't agree with she must be heartbroken

Legally he isn't.

I think this has become a big sticking point in this case re Archie's best interests - which is now the legal case.

It seems to be debating whether the courts decide his best interests or his mum (parents).

Obviously Ms Dance feels it's her decision. Sadly due to safeguarding it doesn't work like that.

But I do think a case review must be held after this and any changes to wording or procedure needed to carefully considered.

I can't imagine ever having to agree to my sons life ending. I'd hope though if I couldn't make the right decision on his behalf the courts could do that quickly for him - rather than this protracted case which isn't in anyones best interests.

TBH I think talk of how Archie could have lived on in others etc is somewhat crass, and while I have very specific views abou the mother’s conduct, I can see how she might feel that people are thinking of her child as a commodity when people are focusing on the fact that his organs could have been donated if only she’d let him go sooner.

Fact is that many families do not consent to organ donation, around 50% in fact. And while many people find it hard to understand that, it is very personal choice to agree to donate your child’s organs.

There are cases in the news all the time of children who have their life support switched off. Even on this thread. Ad nowhere do we ask whether their organs were donated and criticise them if the answer is no.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-62418257

She's just inventing stuff now. Others on here have posted that even in the hospital the sort of set up here will not be full of "noise and chaos".

Can there be any further appeals? Presumably the request for hospice care indicates a measure of acceptance that he will die so in a way it's good.

@BreadInCaptivity your post about parents having to take on 'the authorities' for SEND provision and getting into an embattled state of mind rings so true. I've seen it so many times, and stood in myself (as a volunteer) for parents at meetings where there was a danger of, frankly, tables being thrown over in sheer frustration and anger.

Frequently the parents themselves had additional needs and were being wound up by others with their own axes to grind.

There was always a way forward but it wasn't easy sometimes, and tended to be protracted and groundhog day-ish. On occasion I had to remind the SEND officers and school staff that they were there to discuss the child, not get bogged down in their arguments with the parent(s). The equivalent I see in this case is HD's lawyers, not the medical staff, focusing on all the wrong things. They want to use a child's body to influence a change in the law that would affect us all.

It is essential IMO that this case continues to focus on the child's best interests and only the child's best interests, to circumvent the CLCs of this world. The courts appear clear-sighted on this.

I can't recall the reason that the Lady judges decision to rule him dead was overturned, but could a court now rule, for example, that it would be in his best interests for a decision one way or another, with further scans to be done to make the decision (with all the necessary safeguards in terms of independent medics to comment and a panel of judges to decide). The outcome would surely be that he is dead.

It's so desperately sad for his mum, but I'm at the point now where it seems someone has to tell her he's dead before she'll cease the attempts to prolong the status quo.

I recall Alfie Evans Dad attempted mouth to mouth after Alfie was extubated is that actually true?

I read the Wikipedia page on the case last week and it states very specifically that the dad put out a statement a few days before Alfie’s death stating that they wanted to build bridges with the hospital in order that their son have a peaceful passing. Nowhere was there any mention of attempting to give mouth to mouth.

Do bear in mind that Alfie died several days after his ventilation was removed, so the case was not the same.

I wonder whether the line that he attempted to give mouth to mouth was spin put out there by one of the tabloids or one of these vulture groups.

I was going on that last post from @MNHQ which said that many more deletions and it would be pulled.

It doesn't take much to sabotage a thread.

I agree it should be possible to discuss a huge news story on the News board.

For those with medical knowledge - doesn’t palliative oxygen require the recipient to be capable of breathing?

That's why I said that if I were the hospital I'd be praying that Hollie/the parents got an actual court order to move him. That would absolve the hospital from any liability. The hospital has already said that Archie's 'best interests' are served by disconnecting him, IIRC. Since the parent(s) continue to fight this, perhaps they'd feel it was best if was legally taken out of their hands by an order to transfer.

I guess my feeling is that (again, sorry if I offend anyone) Archie's 'bests interest' would be served by his heart ceasing to beat. If that happens in the hospital, in transit, or in a hospice, Archie himself would know no difference as he can 'know' or feel nothing. The 'circumstances' surrounding his heart ceasing to beat are for the comfort of his parents and his loved ones. If they feel that should happen in a hospice, despite the dangers of moving him, so be it.

It was stated on here during.one of the many threads about his case ,so ti be fair I dint know what actually happened .

It's not just a question of ventilation or oxygen in Archie's case. In one of the court judgments it was said that every one of his bodily functions is being maintained by artificial means - whether that's mechanical, as in ventilation, or by drugs. Even if he were to continue to receive oxygen, if all other treatment is withdrawn, his body will shut down.

@x2boys · I’ve found reference to it now in various tabloids.

It seems that he actually gave successful mouth to mouth over the course of a few days. But I think we have to bear in mind here that Alfie, while his treatment had been withdrawn, was actually alive and was given the opportunity to pass. So while it seems brutal on the face of it I can see how a parent could be pushed towards that when watching his living child over the course of a few days.

I don’t necessarily agree with it, but I can understand it.

In Archie’s case though he is dead. And it’s not going to be like Alfie where he will continue to breathe once the ventilator is removed, he is already dead, so will just look dead the instant the machines are switched off.

She won’t be able to give him mouth to mouth because his heart won’t be beating, and there is no lung capacity.

So while she can talk the talk, she won’t be able to follow through, even if she claims she will.