This is irresponsible and ill-informed. Clearly not read the detailed judgements or the timeline. Shocked that the WSJ would sink to this.
-
-
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
I usually hold WSJ reporting in quite highbesteem, but in this case your article missed the key points of this case entirely.
-
This case was never about universal healthcare or whether NHS is state run or privatised. It was about the ethics of prolonging a life when
-
there was no reasonable hope of improvement, and the rights of the child as an individual on his own vs. absolute final say by parents.
-
The government should not have the right to tell the parents their child cannot live…. End of story
-
The government doesn't, and it didn't. If you don't understand what happened, you probably shouldn't comment.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Can you please employ a lawyer who knows something other than fuckall? It has nothing to do with "the state".
-
The US Senate has just voted to deprive between 22 and 23 million Americans access to healthcare, on such medical grounds as 1/n
-
'They are already ill' and 'they chose not to afford it by being too poor'. Americans can't lecture anyone on govt and health.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
this is what happens when the government is involved in health care
-
I am a governor of an NHS hospital. The government does not run healthcare in England. Please educate yourself before commenting
-
Those who pay the bills/fund it, run the system.
-
Nope. OK lets see if you can tell me how taxpayers money gets in a doctors pay packet, I'll only listen to you if you can tell me the /1
-
You see... that's what happens in the US so it must be true for the rest of the world. (Ignorance is bliss)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
When government controls health care
-
I am a governor of an NHS hospital. The government *does not* control our hospital. Educate yourself before commenting
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
clearly, as many replies point out, terrible, sloppy, ill-informed article. why not focus and comment on the behaviour of Professor Hirano?
-
Because that would not further the "private good, public bad" agenda.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Trite and factually wrong editorial. Perhaps read this paragraph from GOSH statement Full statement here http://www.gosh.nhs.uk/file/23731/download?token=TWJkSxZu …pic.twitter.com/Iji6cTlAo5
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.