to all GN's living in France 4 year old boy missing

Some good sense and.balanced comment from Joan Smith in the Independent

I would not call this latest article balanced jane. Why the need for the reference to the King's beliefs?
"But the fact that his parents belong to a millennial religious cult – members believe that the end of the world is imminent and only 144,000 human beings will be saved – suggests that they might not be entirely open to rational argument. "
But I also remember Joan Smith's article in The Guardian when she was tired of the hysteria over MP's expenses. At that time she was living with the MP Dennis Macshane.

Because holding irrational beliefs does tend to imply an inability to think (and act?) rationally. By which I mean that the journalist has not made an entirely dubious remark. People are, of course, entitled to hold whatever beliefs they choose, but they should not be surprised, and nor should anyone else, if, depending on the basis of their beliefs, their reasoning powers are questioned.

That is not saying anyone should doubt their reasoning powers, only that for someone to do so is not surprising.

I do not think the boy's parents have done anything 'wrong'.

I also think that allowing the boy to die would not be wrong.

I have no idea how I would behave in such circumstances. Emotions and beliefs are powerful forces.

I think the article balances what had been published in the press previously and I suspect that that is what janea meant.

Excellent article bags. I hope that Prague will be far enough away for the press feeding frenzy to fizzle out and leave the family in peace to get on with the thing they want to do. Also bring an end to politicians trying to score brownie points.

It isn't logical to think that the beliefs of a Jehovah's Witness are any more irrational than those of other Christians. That means there are an awful lot of people out there who cannot be trusted to think logically.

Do we know for sure that the doctors at Southampton have no religious beliefs? If they do, then we must assume they too are irrational. Actually, my GP is a devout Christian but he's an excellent doctor.

I thought the article was biased and even a bit on the unpleasant side. I wonder if Joan Smith is living with a surgeon at the moment!

Your post suggests to me that you have misunderstood what I said, petallus. You certainly seem to have read into what I said something I did not say and which I made a deliberate effort to explain that I did not mean.

And then you started making ad hominem remarks about the journalist. That's not proper arguing.

Galen you do right to point that out. I think I meant if his life could be saved.

Yes the article is peppered with patronising and unkind shots at the King family. If Aysha falls into one set of the stats it is a terminal condition.
My Oncologist is a very enthusiastic practising Christian. I'm an agnostic patient. I have never thought of this as a barrier, a problem, of being of any importance at all.

thatbags you are quite right and I should have read your post more carefully. Actually, though, I wasn't thinking primarily of what you said, more the comments of Joan Smith.

My remark about Joan Smith was really an aside. I used to love her writing thirty years ago but recently I have been quite disappointed in some of her articles. There was one last week on why women take nude pictures of themselves. Then this latest article which I found muddled and prejudiced.

A clever, persuasive article, but she neglects to mention that the proton beam therapy the Kings want for their child does not destroy other, nearby parts of the brain, whereas what is available here in the UK does travel through to destroy what is in its firing line. This is why they want PBT. All sides have made errors, some as a reaction to what has been miscommunicated. I wouldn't condemn the family for not taking up Jeremy Hunt's offer - they've lost faith and want to pursue what they see as the best option outside the UK.

The ability to reason and make good decisions doesn't just hinge on religious or scientific beliefs, but on being able to live with the consequences.

Good post when I have noticed only a couple of other posters have also previously brought up the reason why the King family want Ashya to have the proton beam therapy. That very important point seems to have gone unnoticed by many.

This is a diffuse tumour that can spread throughout the brain and spine. How can a targeted beam help?

Hasn't the tumour been removed a few weeks ago? I wouldn't attempt to argue the toss about the technicalities, Galen. I just hope it helps this little boy. There's a lot of press comment about saving his life, and I've read for the first time that his condition is not necessarily a terminal illness, either. Time to leave the family to it - they needed support and tens of thousands rallied to try and help. Now they can get on with it, hopefully without the press pestering them unnecessarily.

Maybe the Kings are trying to balance effectiveness of treatment with likely side effects. I understand radiotherapy/chemotherapy is more likely to have damaging side effects.

I know of someone with terminal cancer who chose to do without chemo, even though it was likely to extend his life by a year or two.

I had a friend and colleague who died from a brain tumour. It was the kind that 'seeded' itself throughout the brain and there was no effective cure.

So did my father

Few of us here have medical skills & knowledge, fewer still knowledge about the efficacy of current available treatments for different types/positions of brain tumors and I strongly suspect none of us have details of the child's medical notes! A few will have the experience to make an informed/educated guess. The media are just tryng to sell papers!

We can all speculate on the treatment he has had/will have but we will never truly know if the journey to Europe to get the family's preferred treatment will /will not extend or improve the quality of this sick child's life. Or, if he had stayed in UK, the outcome might have been the same, better or worse.

We all hope, whatever the treatment, it will provide the best possible outcome for the child with minimum discomfort in the application of the treatment.

What would be good to remember is that 1000s of very sick children and young adults are successfully treated by excellent doctors in the UK and not to let this media hype and single story undermine the health service here. Especially as it is currently under threat of greater erosion with the introduction of TTIP. The NHS is not perfect but it is far better than in many other 'western' countries.

Just heard on the news that he is on his way to Prague now.

Thank you Bags, by 'balanced' I did mean balancing what had been previously written in the press, as Joan Smith set out at the beginning of the article.

I agree Penstemmon that probably none of us are in a position to make an informed judgement about the clinical choices and decisions that have been made.
However, the article did put things in a slightly different perspective in several ways.
Firstly, that the chances of Aysha's survival were greatly increased, if not dependent, on prompt follow-up treatment, which was jeopardised by the family's light to Spain;
Secondly, that the Southampton doctors did refer Ashya to the NHS Specialised Services Proton Clinical Reference Panel, and this panel confirmed the hospital's opinion that proton beam therapy was not suitable in Ashya's case;
And thirdly, the point made by NHS Choices that Proton Beam Therapy Clinics in other countries make perhaps dubious use of marketing techniques to attract patients without making it clear that there are only a small number of tumours for which it is suitable. We are all quick to condemn such marketing when it is used to promote some alternative, non evidenced-based therapy, but perhaps what is not recognised quite so readily is that the purveyors of mainstream, evidenced-based treatments have to make a return on their investments and a profit for their shareholders, and aren't always ethical in the way they do it.

Like everyone else, I do sincerely hope that Ashya doesn't die and has a reasonable quality of life. But it has saddened me to see so much ill-informed, unreasonable and bitter comment against the Southampton doctors in particular, and the medical profession in general.

That article is diabolical. How dare that journalist suggest that Jehovas Witnesses are any less capable of rational thought when it comes to the care of their children, than anyone else! WTF has their religious beliefs got to do with it? (They've already agreed to blood transfusions anyway )

Stupid woman.

I agree with whenim64's post. Leave them alone now. Pray for them if you can.

Perhaps that woman thinks the vote should be taken away from all Jehovas Witnesses. Logical line of thought.

This little boy may die or he may survive with brain damage. Whatever the outcome his parents will know that they have done their best for him.

They are motivated by love alone.

On another thread people are saying they would pay a ransom to save their son's life if he were in a hostage situation. Some say they would do anything to save their child even knowing it was wrong.

jingl I think that the article would have been better without the reference to Jehovah's Witnesses. It was a cheap shot.
But that doesn't make the rest of it less valid.
My understanding is that the Kings belong to what has been described as a 'cult' within Jehovah's Witnesses which believes that the end of the world is imminent and that only 144000 souls will be 'saved'.
Would you say that was a rational belief?