Archie Battersbee thread 5

[henryhihat]

New thread...

My point was that even when people are dead we have a legal responsibility to act in the best interest of the person which must not be over-ridden by the wants of any other person.

As an aside, legally, afaik he is not actually dead, so it's even more clear that his interests are more important than those of his parents.

If Archie dies peacefully in his hospital room, Hollie lost. They provide a dignified withdrawal of treatment, she has failed her appeals.

If she can somehow get him moved to a hospice and he dies en route, she can further claim that the hospital have failed, not provided proper care, executed him en route by not being careful enough. She wins something, the appeal to move him, and she can continue to claim that the hospital are murders.

He hasn't been pronounced dead medically, either

It’s just totally beyond comprehension now. She will appeal to the appeal court, then the Supreme Court, then the European court ad infinitum. That has to stop. It’s utterly obscene to do this to the child. What is in his best interests is to just let him go in peace now. The Victorian’s used to prop up their recently dead and put them in various poses for family photos and what is being plastered all over Facebook isn much different now. It’s utterly in fathomable.

I totally agree.

I can't begin to imagine what the family are going through, but it needs to be about his best interests, not hers.

I do hope she gets, and accepts, all the help she needs in the coming months to grieve.

@Quia thanks. So the same over and over. Thought this would be the end.

I would be astonished if his kidneys were functioning at all by now, so I doubt he'd produce any urine.

I'm really sad about this discussion though, @itsgettingweird . Never thought I'd be discussing this. Terrible case.

I can be a bit dispassionate, which helps in appreciating radically different opinions.

Medics, while prioritising care for patients, also deal with bodily mess, decay, deterioration, death and manage things that most of us would turn away from.

Archie is gone, his mum is still alive. How we handle her, and everyone else around Archie, is just as important as how we handle him.

I just can't help but think of other parents currently making decisions like this and dealing with grief. There will be many parents going through the same heartbreak but they will be doing it with dignity.

This behaviour from Hollie is dangerous and seems almost to be her trying to show she loves her child more. It seems to be very much about her. The other parents going through this same situation will understand it is about the child. They are the ones with dignity.

I think digging into his parents' past (let's face it: his mother's past) is an attempt to paint her in a bad light (unfortunately it seems to be doing it's job there). It is absolutely shitty and unacceptable, because it's dragging us back to the acceptable and unacceptable victims that we see so often in other cases (rape etc)

It's true about acceptable and unacceptable victims quite often.

But the only thing I've seen referenced re last is people trying to understand what makes someone act like this (these cases are rare) when it's unusual (as many very brave mums who have had courage to share here) and people do make these decisions for their child's best interests.

And there are still legal parameters around funerals. You CANNOT do whatever you want to a body at funeral, however cathartic siblings queuing up and stabbing a violent father may be.

I have to say, I've changed my opinions over the course of this. I've become more sympathetic to her plight- not her demands or her behaviour or her accusations- but to the position she is in.

It's not about Archie anymore, for me. (I recognise medically and legally it has to be.)

I'm sure the staff will have cared for him carefully and lovingly anyway simply because that is what good staff. However in this case they really have had no option from a legal point of view to do so for the last three or four months. Everything they do is scrutinised, not just by Archie's family but by the courts and senior management. Any misstep and that's potentially the hospital's reputation harmed and legal costs to pay.

Imagine the pressure the staff are under. The anxiety.

I've had a child in intensive care who had their life saved by the NHS staff, but who, after surviving, was subject to an error by staff. It meant they received treatment they shouldn't have. It took a day for staff to catch it and the hospital apologised, but harm was done. If I was a parent with a child in NICU or PICU now, I suspect I would feel irrationally resentful that Archie, who has no hope of recovery, is undoubtedly receiving care that is scrutinised by the highest levels of the hospital when children with a chance of survival are not. (I'm not saying they're not receiving brilliant care, just that it won't be as supervised.)

If it's the conversation about her son's penis - It isn't text- it's from the son's Facebook page.

Why would you rather the possibility of your child dying alone in the back of an ambulance? That's just madness, this whole thing is madness. This is just about her need to win now and it's really very sad.

The mother's case from the start has been that the child is aware, is squeezing her hand, is likely to recover, is not at end of life and so care should be continued.

This can't be a belief held alongside a belief that it does not matter if the child experiences collapse and death in a hallway or lift or on a road somewhere in the care of strangers. Family would not be permitted to be with him during transfer.

I like that point, @titchy! I'll be thinking about it a lot.

We used to have public executions, where the body was deliberately desecrated, scorned and mocked.

We used to control who was allowed to be buried where. We still have some legal restrictions I believe, about miscarried babies.

What's 'right and proper' changes with time.

ITN reporting they've filed papers for the (inevitable) appeal....

When I experienced a similar situation it was a peaceful and well managed experience. Of course it was incredibly distressing but the staff were amazing. We were treated with tenderness and consideration. There is no need for Archie to be moved from where he is.

Those aren't text conversations. They're screenshot from their (at the time) public Facebook pages

I would be greatly concerned for the hospice if she were to succeed in getting him transferred to one. Even if they did manage a smooth withdrawal of treatment shortly after arrival I can imagine her wanting to stay with the body - did someone say there is a cool room? - and them just not being able to get her off the premises.

Iirc Charlie Guard died within 2-3 hours of arrival at the hospice and I thought then it was pointless and I think it now in this case, notwithstanding the issue of a breakdown of relations with hospital staff and parents wishing for the end to occur off the premises.

I’m sorry for what you and your child went through and don’t blame you for feeling resentment at all.

regardless of staff having had to care for Archie, I’m still in awe. Even though it’s their job it’s still an incredibly difficult position to be in, not just the care but the scrutiny and accusations on top. They could have gone on sick with stress, but they haven’t (the ones who haven’t anyway who’ve continued to provide care). It really does show their compassion to be able to show up every day and do their job in this position.

She's obviously desperate for the a short term 'win' against the hospital that she can't see the long term consequences of looking back and thinking 'oh god why did I let my son die in a lift/corridor/ambulance, without me beside him'

Just don't do it!

It’s pretty clear they’re just filing appeal after appeal, content irrelevant, to delay the end so that they ‘win’ and Archie’s poor body gives up on its own. Trying to run the clock down. The argument about disability and religion proved that.