From Charlie Gard to school attendance: Is the fascist State of the UK taking parent’s rights away?

ou

Nanny-State

First, a father has lost a landmark battle at the UK’s highest court over taking his daughter out of school on an unauthorised holiday during term time.

He requested for permission to take his daughter out of school was refused by her headteacher.

He took a week vacation off work to spend it all with his daughter at Disneyland. The High Court ruling in May last year cleared Mr Platt of failing to ensure his daughter attended school regularly, as required by section 444(1) of the Education Act 1996. The girl had good school attendance.

First case: State x Family.

A second family, Chris Gard and Connie Yates wanted the 10-month-old Charlie Gard, who suffers from a rare genetic condition and has brain damage, to undergo a therapy trial in the US but lost their final legal battle on Tuesday. The European Court of “Human Rights” has rejected a plea from the parents of a terminally ill British baby to intervene in the case.

Chris Gard and Connie Yates, from Bedfont, west London wanted him to undergo a therapy trial in the US. They raised the money for the treatment online (no State support).

The Pope and Trump offered support to child’s parents.

Furthermore, some doctors (who should save lives ) and European bureaucrats have decided that his life support machines should be turned off. Bureaucrats decided and not his parents.

Second case: State x Family.

Feminists and SJW talk about “empowering Women & Girls” but stay in silence about this. Probably because they think abortion is “great” and they want it paid by the government.

Third case: State x self responsibility.

Does the government own our kids because we cannot decide what they need most? Are our freedoms being diminished by the day? The evil and Fascist leader Fascism once said: All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.

Well, Nanny State is fascism.

nanny-state2

In 2017 it has been applied against the families.

Charlie Gard case is specially heart breaking.

Charlie Gard has got a last option. His parents have got the money (no government support) but the State is controlling his life. The State wants his death. If the potential new treatment would not work, Charlie will die. But if it would work, he has got the chance to live. But the State does not want that.  There is no choice for the parents.
The final argument we are left with is : Should the parents be able to decide their sons fate? The answer is yes. They love their children. For the State, their children is just a number.
Charlie’s parents have fought for their baby son every step of the way, they privately raised money to fund treatment in the USA. They have the right to consider that treatment experimental, they also have the right to voice that opinion they do not have the right to take away the parents choice, unless the parents are a danger to the child or not of sound mind (which is not the case).
Imagine being in their position. We would also want to know we exhausted every option, tried everything to give our son/ daughter a chance at life.
The real argument here about both cases above ultimately comes down to this: Family x State.
Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s