There was a recent controversy around the health care of a terminally-ill 11-month-old baby in the United Kingdom.
The infant was born with a serious mitochondrial disorder that led to the wasting of his muscles and brain. There is no definitive treatment and the baby was on life support for months. His parents wanted to take him to the United States where an experimental therapy could be attempted, with an estimated 10% chance of benefit. Doctors in London said that his clinical condition ruled out any benefit and felt it would be unethical to subject the baby to the turmoil. They felt that the boy should be allowed to die with dignity. The parents took the hospital to the court.
If you were the judge of the court, what course of action would you suggest and why?
jagan 7 years
human life is gifted to live with all equal benifits . we have created the system of patriacial polical juristiction to control human being from unneeded miscellaneous activities and to protect each biotic life in this ecosystem.
the boy of 10 years old , he has the full dignity to live in this society. from traditional way to modern way off hospital have been helping people does the same in each part of the world to safe life of human who are not in physically are mentally fit .
so when the parents are logical to safe there child who has 10percent of chance to live has to be given full support from government and by hospitals. ofcourse it is a turnmoil situation proper technical health support should be give til the child transited to advanced mordern hospital it may be in any other alien territory. All thought probability may b less but tht childs souls gets a chance to survive.
so i conclude with , if there is chance of survival certain measures has to be taken . It is also questinable that if the same situation happen to any political leader and what happen next.
Shashi Kant sharma 7 years
The boy biologically born ill so he deserve right to life for which he deserve medical assisstance although doctor claim that he can not be treated if so chances would be 10% and no guarantee of growing normal in future yet the state has responsibility to save life.
However , the cost involve in treatment is not a matter of concern but doctor statement must be consider as it forwarded to parents with care and softness.
Duty of state to save life must be full fill but consequences must be known that unable to save him.
Because its loss of life and money both.
Boy inflict unneccessory pain.
vinod 7 years
