After the last goodbye.

[BongoJim]

I know the last thread was removed because there was too much speculation and I get that. I believe a lot of people shared a lot of personal stories and experiences which were important and gave powerful insights. Would we be able to continue the debate without the speculation (start your own topic for that) and instead just continue to debate where cases like this need to change going forward, how court processes can change as a result of such difficult cases and what lessons can be taken from this awful case without it being a thread about a thread? It would be a shame to lose being able to discuss every other aspect of an important debate just because one aspect of it is problematic for MN. Is it even possible to continue debating the wider implications thrown up by a case like this? If it's not then my all means MN please delete. 🥺

Accusing an institution of wanting to murder a child to harvest their organs.

Thats very different from accusing an institution of not providing care of a good standard. Eg missing meds etc.

But when someone has 2:1 care 24/7 it's so blatantly untrue but could make an anxious parent about to take their child to that hospital for risky life saving surgery cancel it and out their own child's life at risk.

Is it not defamatory to publicly state that a hospital and its staff are murderers with intent to harvest blood and organs

In my view it is absolutely defamatory. In defamation the burden of proof is on the defendant to prove what they said was true. That would be well-nigh impossible were the hospital trust decide to bring a defamation case. They are unlikely to under the circumstances though, I would think.

Of course it is. I have not in any posts disagreed with this. You are not however considering the wider issues of legislating to stop people from discussing their concerns. In fact I should say that I have only heard these comments when people have copied them off Facebook etc.
There is a great deal of horrible content and abuse on twitter or Facebook etc. If you want to legislate to stop people saying horrible things then look at those sites. The companies have the powers already to delete tweets and suspend posts and accounts.

I think the family can express whatever opinion they want, but that doesn't include making statements that aren't true.

They said that the trust:

• Wanted to withdraw LF so they could "harvest" his organs and to save money, not because it was in his best interests
• Was starving him deliberately
• Deliberately tried to neglect him so he would get sepsis
• Were lying about his organ failure, weight loss & that there was no respiratory effort
• Were lying about the amount of medication he's on
• Included a who nurse told them to not leave him alone as he wouldn't be safe
• Presented MRI scans that weren't his
• Made deliberate mistakes regarding his vasopressin dosage to try and kill him
• Were planning on slaughtering/murdering/executing him

These aren't rumours or heresay, these were all public statements made by the family/CLC on facebook & to news outlets @cansu .

And indeed many of these claims were addressed in hearings & the evidence given by his medical team demonstrates they are categorically not true @cansu Can all be found the publicly available judgements.

Thanks @itsgettingweird

I am confused by these Archie case. Well on found out that he tried to kill himself and not sure if it's true or not.
I wonder if the family have been having counselling even before they switched off the life support machine. I feel the mother did all she thought was best but need help her to come to terms with that he was brain dead and the machines were just keeping him a live.
I just think she seems to be taking out her grief on the hospital and it seems like they in their eyes the doctors and nurses have killed him.
I just think more help for parents like speaking to counsellor especially when your not thinking straight.
I am very sad a boy has passed away but no need to go this far. If he did kill himself then it's guilt from the family not noticing how unhappy he was. Which needs to be addressed not inquiry.
They need to see bereavement counsellor. I think his mother needs meds too. It's any parent worse nightmare finding their son like that. It's just very sad they causing themselves more stress and not preparing to give him a great funeral.

Defamation definition is that it must be "Words disparaging a person in their office, trade, business, or profession" (also extends to bodies and organisations). If the multitude if untrue statements delineated above by @1blossomtree don't fit that definition I don't know what does.

Not quite the same as he was an adult but such a difference with the case of Kate Garraways husband. He was photographed and filmed and a whole programme about his condition. Shown lying with tubes and machines, even when he started to come out of the coma he was shown crying and unable to communicate but I have never seen any concerns about his dignity or his inability to give consent. In fact I think Kate Garraway has had lots of praise for her bravery in showing it and even got some sort of award.

Is the difference that he was an adult, that Kate is a popular and likeable figure, that she wasn't criticising the hospital?

Should we have protection for adult's rights to privacy and dignity in these cases? I'd hate to think of being filmed if I was as sick as that poor man, not that anyone would be interested but there is still the principle.

Rules regarding anonymity and no photos are unenforcable. Trying to push that information to the fringes, social media and underground is an attempt to limit debate and free speech, obscure personal experience, and limit assistance (medical, financial and public).

Policies regarding critical/terminal illnesses and end of life care are continually being adapted in situ in ways contrary to government guidance, and the dignity and rights of the patient. Any legal process should go through appeals and have recourse to international courts.

Patients and families with less income, resources and information are already hugely disadvantaged in the healthcare system. That is what we should be working to change imo. We shouldn't be trying to shroud information in even more secrecy. The public, the sick and their families are entitled to know exactly where and how decisions are made. They need to know when policies quietly shift, when boundaries are pushed, where budgets hit quality of life discussions and end of life care. These discussions and subtle shifts in caring policy are fundamental to our human rights and they shouldn't be made by nameless indiviuals in an office or at a bedside.

What is slanderous? If I say hate a hospital doesn't treat my child humanely, is that slanderous? I am stating my opinion. Should I not say this? Should these families not say this?

Say it if you want- doesn't make it true. Adding "that's just my opinion" doesn't get you off the hook if you publicly proclaim your child was treated "inhumanely" and the medical staff challenge your defamatory statements.

TheDudesmummy
Who says whether a statement is untrue? If I say that my son was left unwashed and locked in a room with no blankets and that this was done to him in an NHS hospital, is this defamation? Clearly the hospital will not want me to say this publicly. Do I not have a right to make this public? If your relative is badly treated in a care home, is it defamation if you say the staff treated him or her badly and without compassion, is that defamation?

Did you read my post though?

I've pointed out many of these statements were addressed in court & evidence provided to demonstrate they categorically weren't true. And yet they were continued to be said.

I can understand support and sympathy for the family, but surely you can see why this isn't helpful for anyone (the patient, the family, the hospital, the public) for this to happen.

If I am not allowed to say it then there is no public accountability. Do you want to live in a society where abuse is kept secret? What would you do if your relative received poor or abusive care? You complain but they ignore you or deny it. Then what? There are many cases where people have recorded abuse that would never have been revealed if it were not for people coming out and challenging it. Look at Winterbourne. There are many many examples.

And who says a statement is true, do we have to resort to cameras and cctv now to,protect patients and staff.

A statement is not defamatory if it is true. As to who decides, in a defamation case, if you are the person making those statements and you are sued, then you as defender have to prove they are true (in a reversal of the usual rule that the pursuer has to prove their case).

The decision is made by the judge or a jury if it's a civil jury trial.

I assume you are speaking from personal experience but the scenarios you mention are wholly irrelevant to the Dance situation.

I always thought it was inappropriate to show Derek like that as he seemed to lack capacity so can't consent to being on TV . I didn't think it was dignified for him.

Same with that little boy being shown in the media in a nappy, he's 12 years old and that's the last photo his friends will see of him. I think there needs to be anonymity in cases like that. Also I think we need to question why do certain sections of our society distrust HCPs so much ? His case was pretty clear cut medically speaking he had 0 percent chance of ever making any meaningful recovery because of the severity of his injuries. Why couldn't the family believe that even now?

1blossomtree. I am not talking about the statements made in Archie's case. I am talking about the principle that it is OK for people to talk openly about their concerns about care. No they shouldn't call it execution etc but they can say that their relatives are not being looked after correctly. They can say the treatment is cruel or abusive. If they can't, more abuse will occur especially for people with learning difficulties who are very vulnerable to abuse.

I am NOT especially talking about this case. The point is to discuss the implications of the issues raised in this case. I amnot sure why my raising cases that don't fit the narrative means that I am wrong to raise them.

Exactly - my goodness some of the stuff you would not believe until you've been there yourself.
It's interesting that I tried several times to share my experience of losing trust, poor care and no-one responded across these threads, because 'the NHS and social care is amazing' and if it goes wrong it's the parents fault for not understanding/being difficult/not listening etc. Staggering, not even a whiff of acceptance that the NHS/social care might get it wrong.

No one has remotely suggested what you are saying.

Several posters have said , and I'm paraphrasing , suffering the loss of a child does not, and should not, give any-one a free pass to make wild, irrational, untrue and damaging allegations against NHS Staff with no fear of challenge or consequences.

Not defamation if you can evidence it.

And saying something like "they were left alone in a room for 30 minutes alone when they can't do x y and z and this falls below the standards I expect of care" is an opinion based on actual events.

Saying a hospital wants to murder a child for their organs and is starving them when the evidence is obviously so different (2:1 24/7 care with meds and nutrition) is a totally different situation.

The previous very high profile cases of care in hospital haven't had such statements made.

I didn't agree with a previous case where people were encouraged to go to the hospital and protest.

The current hearing in the USA regards the capitol buildings could have some good outcomes and policy changes which could be useful for our system too.

The winterbourne case made some very public accusations. All backed up with filmed evidence of the abuse.

No one ignored or denied it though.

Taking the claim about MRI scans. The family said scans showing catastrophic brain damage were not the patient & that the hospital was lying in an attempt to withdraw life support early.

Unequivocal proof was provided, first to the family themselves informally that the scans were indeed of the patient. When this didn't work, it was adressed in a court hearing and in an appeal.

Yet these claims are still being made by the family and the CLC.

This is the case for many other statements about the hospital.

Several posters have said , and I'm paraphrasing , suffering the loss of a child does not, and should not, give any-one a free pass to make wild, irrational, untrue and damaging allegations against NHS Staff with no fear of challenge or consequences.

So, if you're not allowed to take photos and record this stuff, how will you evidence it? Ask nicely and then accept whatever you're told?
I don't know why you're all up in arms and wanting the law changed just because of a few high profile cases. If staff don't trawl for this stuff they'll just see it on the news and it won't come as a surprise anyway.