It kind of does. Brits decided to surrender their health to the government and now are mad about having government medicine.
-
-
Replying to @Alrenous
The ruling would have been the same if there was no government healthcare in Britain. Why does nobody understand this?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @anomalyuk
I'm pretty sure it would be different, it wouldn't be up to a bureaucrat, because they're not paying for it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Alrenous
Wrong. The whole case was based on the parents wanting to take the child to the US and pay for it themselves.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @anomalyuk
Not wrong, and this is obviously futile, so I'm going to stop wasting my time.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Alrenous
How is a simple question of fact futile? The Charlie Gard case was not about whether the government should pay, that was never suggested.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @anomalyuk @Alrenous
It was not about whether the parents should be allowed to get private treatment, that happens every day, it's completely normal.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
It was about whether a bunch of social workers and judges can decide whether it was in the child's personal interest to live or die.
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.