a 5 yr old's bravery

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by brazenhussy, Feb 6, 2007.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Really sad -
    story of a poor 5 yr old kid - made me realise me problems aren't that bad after all....................(taken from GMTV)
    Jack Brown
    A couple who may have to sell their home to pay for cancer treatments for their son are blaming NHS under-funding
    Yvonne Brown and her husband Richard have moved from London to New York in hope of curing their son of a rare form of cancer.
    Five-year-old Jack has neuroblastoma, and the family need to raise 375,000 pounds if they are to help him.
    The Browns, both former Scotland Yard officers, have been living with their children in one room in Manhattan since Dec 1st while Jack receives treatment at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Center.
    The hospital is the only place in the world that provides an antibody treatment for neuroblastoma, a cancer that attacks nerve cells.
    British experts had given Jack a 20 per cent chance of survival after he was diagnosed with neuroblastoma in 2004, and said that it would be incurable if he relapsed. They also warned her that the American hospital would "simply take your money and experiment on your child".
    The financial cost for the family has been crippling - the couple need to raise $750,000 (£375,000) to cover Jack's US medical bills – but she said that the antibody treatment has so far had a 75 per cent success rate.
    She stressed that since he had been given the treatment, Jack had only relapsed in his brain, which was also the only place that the antibodies are unable to reach.
    Mrs Brown, who lives in Barnet, north London, said she feared that the British scepticism about the treatment was motivated more by financial than medical considerations.
    Jack was due to start chemotherapy today and Great Ormond Street Hospital, which keeps his stem cells, had refused to get involved.
    The couple will have to pay around £12,600 to have the cells couriered out to New York after the London hospital refused to let a family friend bring them out.
    The Metropolitan Police has allowed the couple to keep their jobs as detectives in north London while the Commissioner's office notified its New York counterpart of their predicament. "At the moment the Met has been hugely supportive to us but we can't go on like this for ever," said Mrs Brown.
    The couple, and their two older children, have been living with Jack in one small room in the Ronald McDonald house, a charity for seriously ill children.
    They have received numerous offers of support from New York police officers who have learnt of their plight. An anonymous British benefactor has promised to give them $350,000 if they can raise the same amount themselves.
    "Not raising this money is not an option. People tell us how strong we are, but we're not," said Mrs Brown. "You do it because you don't have a choice. He's a fantastic child and we will do whatever we can to give him the best chance of life.
    "It's very humbling that people are prepared to do this for a child they never met."

    http://www.jackbrownappeal.org/
     
  2. NHS should be paying for this innocent kid instead of wasting money on smokers and drinkers, they had their chance with their bodies and wasted it, so be it. Time we stopped wasting money on the smokers and obese food addicts and put it where it belongs. The NHS pays for tit enlargement, treatment for drug addicts, cosmetic surgery and frickin IVF treatment, what a travesty! I am enraged (for a change)
     
  3. on the same wave length as me Ling- i couldnt believe it- like u said IVF, smokers, etc- it was ok for a 60+ woman to have IVF so why not fund this kid?
     
  4. I am surprised they don't give out viagra for free (please tell me they don't)...
    They gave a 60 year old IVF????? That is a disgrace.
     
  5. OK I'll bite :lol: some people find it difficult to feel a lot of sympathy for addicts - agents of their own destruction - but I have a great deal of sympathy for them having recently struggled to stop smoking and not turn into Michelin woman!

    In the case outined above I'm very concerned about the other 2 children whose lives have been turned upside down for the sake of a very uncertain outcome. I saw the family on TV recently and have great sympathy for their tragic circumstances. I once faced a not dissimilar decision re. uncertain medical treatment as a private hospital tried to apply not very subtle pressure to get us to agree to continue uncertain treatment there even though we had already spent 4/5 of a lump of money left to us there with no improvement. Ours wasn't such a stark choice but equally hard to resist the lure that there 'might' be a cure and this was from a very well respected institution and from a medical professional who had already worked with the family for about three years. In our case an alternative NHS treatment WAS available but it was still the hardest decision ever because one would spend every last penny when a loved one is in pain - how much more vulnerable are families when it's a case of a child.

    It's tough - but I have a bit of sympathy for addicts of all sorts too - I think we should consider the different physiological responses to food/alcohol/nicotine we aren't robots, and after all we are subjected to a lot of pressure from advertising. I put weight on when I stopped smoking - imagine the dilemma that posed ...

    interresting topic though - sad cause for it

    GR

    p.s. to change NHS policies and get more spent on health services get campaigning - I suspect it will be a long time though before even the traditionally spendthrift left will be willing to move away from the middle ground where they are pretending to apply market principles to the NHS in a half-hearted fashion. I personally think that the single thing that the govt. could do to improve the health of the nation is to make all sports and exercise facilities free of charge.
     
  6. I have no sympathy for addicts who rob innocent people of their hard earned money, drunks or smokers who cough all over me and complain that they cant breath because of the onset of COPD. Tough, What do you want me to do about it. And as for obese, smoking, drinking people, perhaps they would like to pay for my osteopath fees because i have to carry them due to our protocols. I sympathise with the family, there is nothing stronger than a mothers love!!
     
  7. not all fertility treatment...is for older women you know , with out it i would not have had my two children...

    if you have never been told ...."sory you can never have children" then you do not know the pain an misery that it can cause

    And as for moaning about fat people (i HATE that word) not every one is lbig just for the fun of it...

    Some are born with the propensity to being big as are those who eat all day long and yet are skinny..

    Try living in other lives before you condem them..not one of us is perfect and we should all rember that.. We all take the piss out of others but is it realy because we are hidding from our own shittyness...

    This would be a boring life if we all had the same needs an desire's
     
  8. Why did GOSH not allow a family friend to take the stem cells to the family? They just used up £12,600 badly needed funds....
     

  9. my sentiments too JC
    :smile:
     
  10. I am aware that IVF is not just for old people but what I said was that why should this non life threatening treatment be available for people when a kid who is likely going to die can't get it's treatment provided? That aint right!No one is going to die if they don't get IVF are they?
    As for FAT peoples treatment, if they have some kind of illness, fine, but if it is just cos they eat too much or exercise too little, no dice, that's just laziness.
    Did I condemn them? The world is full of all types, fatties, drunks, smokers and poor kids with life threatening illnesses, I know who I feel sorry for and who I don't.
     
  11. All of these situations are born out of poor funding.

    Governments have so much to answer for in their mismanagement of the treasury. The problem goes back to the destruction of heavy industry in UK. Such industry brought in considerable wealth. We are now in a service industry situation, and that provides a far less certain financial footing.

    What is our great contribution to expansion in UK at the moment? A casino! We would be far better off rebuilding a steelworks and reopening a few coal mines to feed it. Then we wouldn't have to rely so much on inferior imported steel and fuel.

    Unless a government has the balls to tackle the redistribution of wealth, and the encouragement of a strong manufacturing export industry, this country is well on its way down the pan.

    My heart goes out to this youngster and his family.... but he ain't the only one the NHS have let down.

    It is easy to sit back and say that what money they have is being spent on the wrong sort of patient. That does not solve the problem, and would put the NHS in an even more impossible judgmental position. It is also trying to solve the problem of underfunding working from the bottom up. It needs addressing from the top down, i.e. sensible taxing leading to sensible funding, administered by sensible management, thus supporting skilled staff.

    The population of this country is expanding, yet their way of dealing with underfunding is to close down local hospitals and centralise. This cannot work. It will lead to sick people having to travel a lot further for treatment, to queues for beds during epidemics, and overworked, tired, mostly foreign staff who will make poor decisions.

    It is asset stripping, something that Thatcher was good at, but once assets are gone they're gone for ever.

    It is no good treating symptoms. We need to treat the cause.... but I fear it is too late. We are already losing grip on the slippery slope.

    Rant over.... for now.
     
  12. I'm a little curious as to why the NHS are not in agreement with this treatment. Mrs Brown has suspicions that the motivations were financial as opposed to medical but we must remember that her opinion is bound to be biased. Although I will not rule out that the cost of the treatment was not a factor in the NHS decision, I have a little faith in the health services to judge that this was for the most part, a medical consideration.

    The USA is not well-known for sharing information, and if this is the only hospital in the world that can provide this treatment, I can see how a hospital governor could perhaps 'exploit' this advantage to make a lot of money for the hospital. Hence the NHS consider the treatment experimental, possibly risky and don't understand the treatment well enough to seriously recommend it. So how can they be expected to pay for it? British experts told the parents:

    "They will just take your money and experiment on your child."

    This inclines me to believe that the NHS do not trust this American hospital, and this could explain why they are going out of their way to hinder the treatment. I agree that the health service does have a tendency to waste money, but I don't think they were trying to save anything by witholding financial contributions, except possibly Jack's life.
     
  13. Josie
    I have nothing against fat people in general, my bitch is with obese people who dont make any effort to look after thenselves properly, I.E diet, giving up drinking and smoking and generally looking after themseves. I know a nurse who about 6'6" and is probably 17 stone. To say that she is fat is ridiculous because she would indeed look stupid if she was skinny. Hope that clears that one up my friend

    NB
     
  14. lingyai

    you are obviously either a proper daddy married to a proper mummy who had kids the proper way.

    unfortunately some of us ie mself, wife and children are the bloodsucking scum of the NHS who deemed it a waste of money to have children the awkward way by spending some of your hard earned cash having some drugs given to us for IVF treatment.

    in fact why not go the whole way - its your taxpayers money that contributed to their conception - ergo you are therefore guilty by association and therfore under CSA rules you owe us some cash for non-supportive parenting.

    have i got your attention now - take your all encompassing statements and shove em up your arse
     
  15.  
  16. Read my post again and tell me if I said it was a waste of money, I was using it as a comparison so shove that up your arse
     
  17. wet_blobby

    wet_blobby War Hero Moderator

    Sorry mate they do give out viagra for free, where'd you think all the tablets that get sold in pubs come from? from old codgers who get them as a free prescription then sell them on, so whats worse.. claiming prescriptions falsley or having such a p1ss poor pension that your forced to so you can make a bit of dosh?..... I honestly couldn't answer that.
     
  18. when i started this i never meant to offend genuine cases, but i was shocked at the way the nhs wouldnt help this kid- i dont have a problem with those that cant concieve etc
     
  19. I think people know that, it was a good post, it was my comparisons that wound a couple of people up I think. I stand by my comments though, they aren't meant to be inflammatory, I just feel that non life threatening treatment is not as important as a terminal kid, what's wrong with that statement is beyond me. :shock:
     
  20. On another note its good to see the NYPD showing solidarity with the family, they must be going through hell.

    stab
     

Share This Page