After Using His Son to Beg for Socialized Medicine, Jimmy Kimmel Silent as It Kills Baby Alfie

in news •  7 years ago 

By Matt Agorist

 A 23-month-old baby boy has died after he was held hostage by the  British government against the wishes of his parents who may have been  able to save his life. The denial of medical care to baby Alfie—which  was being offered to him for free  by doctors in Italy—happened, not out of some vile conspiracy to harm a  child, but as a function of the British healthcare system. 

“My gladiator lay down his shield and gained his wings at 02:30. I  love you my guy,” Tom Evans, Alfie’s father wrote on his Facebook page  Saturday.

 “Our baby boy grew his wings tonight at 2:30 am,” his mother Kate  wrote. “We are heart broken. Thank you everyone for all your support.” Alfie’s life began as a struggle and the toddler had been in a  hospital since December of 2016 because of a rare degenerative  neurological disorder. 

This year, the Alder Hey Children’s Hospital, run  by bureaucrats who are apparently more interested in saving money than  saving lives, decided that Alfie’s life was no longer worth saving. The Vatican hospital in Rome offered free medical care, with  experimental treatments that are not offered in the UK, which could’ve  saved Alfie’s life, and came at no expense to the UK government.  However, the bureaucrats ruled that “all medical experts agreed that further treatment was futile and that it would be against Alfie’s best interests to travel to Italy.” 

Alfie’s father had been attempting to appeal these rulings so the  family could seek this treatment. But despite the fact that this would  have come at no cost to the UK government or the hospital, they forced  the family to stay in the UK.   

Alfie was denied food by his “caregivers” at the hospital and his  life came to a tragic and potentially preventable end this week as he  was starved to death by the state. And, in spite of multiple protests  from governments and political figures from around the world—including  the Pope—no one will be held accountable because Alfie’s death was a function of the state.   

“When we give the government the power to make medical decisions for  us, we, in essence, accept that the state owns our bodies,” former  Congressman Ron Paul once said. 

In their decision to refuse the parents  the opportunity to treat their child as they wished, the British  government made its point that it owns the bodies of its citizens. But Alfie was sick and was going to die anyway, many people will  claim. However, it should have been up to his parents—not the  government—to decide Alfie’s fate. Had Alfie been able to leave, as the case of Ashya King illustrates,  he may be alive today.

 King, whose cancerous brain tumor earned him a  similar death sentence, fled the U.K. with his parents and sought treatment, ultimately in the Czech Republic. Today, he’s cancer free

Unfortunately, this system that effectively sentenced a baby to die  is championed by many who claim that government should be in charge of  medicine. For example, talk show host, Jimmy Kimmel delivered an emotional  monologue last year about his new son, who was born with severe heart  defects requiring emergency surgery. At the end of it, he urged  Americans to support the Affordable Care Act. 

This speech was picked up  by media everywhere and repeatedly covered to push for the ACA. Kimmel claimed that before 2014, “if you were born with congenital  heart disease like my son was, there was a good chance you’d never be  able to get health insurance because you had a pre-existing condition.  You were born with a pre-existing condition and if your parents didn’t  have medical insurance, you might not live long enough to even get  denied because of a pre-existing condition.” 

However, this is false. If parents have health insurance, their child  would be covered. Also, the term “pre-existing condition” is used to  describe uninsured chronically ill people who apply for insurance  coverage, not for a child in need of immediate care like Kimmel’s son.  

What’s more, hospitals in the United States are legally obligated to  provide emergency care to all patients—regardless of insurance status. Kimmel then wrapped up his monologue stating, 

“If your baby is going  to die and it doesn’t have to, it shouldn’t matter how much money you  make.” 

Indeed, it should not matter, but it also should not matter what the  state tells you to do in regards to saving your baby’s life. And, the  very system Kimmel proposed that night as he shilled for the ACA—which  is a direct giveaway to big insurance companies (but another topic  altogether)—is what forced a baby to die, even though he didn’t have to. 

Where is Jimmy Kimmel now? America’s health system is far from perfect. But for now, at least,  babies are allowed to receive any treatment their parents wish, up to  and including being able to leave the country and receive free care from  the Vatican. 


 We are the Free Thought Project — a hub for Free Thinking conversations about the promotion of liberty and the daunting task of government accountability. All of our content was created by our team of artists and writers. Learn more about us on our website thefreethoughtproject.com.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Curated for #informationwar (by @openparadigm)
Relevance: Campaign against the family
Our Purpose

Kimmel is a liberal shill & probably far worse. Sold his soul long ago

...not out of some vile conspiracy to harm a child

It was not a conspiracy to harm a child, it was a conspiracy to HARM ALL CHILDREN.

How dare doctors remove food and air from someone? Knowing that they will die. Just kill them, if you are going to do that. Suffocate them in a helium tent. (the body doesn't go into alert that there isn't any air.) Or any one of a number of injections.

No, these hypocrites have to starve someone to death. After they tried to kill the baby with poor hygiene and gut destruction. After they tried to kill the baby with mercury poisoning and immune destruction.

I wrote my piece about this here:
Baby Alfie Evans... What a Tragedy... and what WE need to Learn!

Great article! The thing that is perhaps most frustrating about the Alfie story is that it was not simply a "medical" decision that kept his parents from seeking other treatments. It would be reasonable to accept that the doctors at his hospital simply could not provide him any further treatment but that alone would not preclude his parents from seeking alternatives. It was the state's overreach regarding child "protection" that really left them defenseless. Of course, the likes of Kimmel and others would be all too anxious to add socialized medicine to the tools of control already at their government's disposal. It never seems to be about the medical care itself but rather the control that exclusive delivery of medical care provides the government. It's not just single payor they are after, it single provider.

Pretty biased posting never mentoring in what condition the baby was. @stefan.molyneux was more honest here. Molyneux too criticised the government but after telling the brutal truth of the state the baby was in.

… with experimental treatments …

That explains why it was offered free

molynuex has a bias against alternative treatments, so he would make a big deal about the condition the child is. He has also been known to support actions of government that he finds acceptable.

We dont think the condition of the child is relevant, the state should not have any right to do what they did

I see that very split. if an animal suffers, it is euthanized. When a person suffers everything is done that this suffering is not terminated by the dead. I'm not a doctor and therefore can not judge whether the boy could have become healthy again. I think the doctors have made the right decision, because contrary to the social opinion, not every single life counts. If we accepted death again as part of life we ​​would suffer less.

Is it any surprise? In a related story, those who praised Venezuela in 2012 haven't spoken a word since the country descended to hell soon after

Good article! A lot of people need to think about this, including Kimmel!

This is sad knowing that parents can watch their children die . I have an 8 month old baby boy and I’d do the world for him

Yeah, because Jimmy Kimmel should speak out against injustices globally. UK healthcare isn't the same as here. Jimmy Kimmel didn't do "a", "b" and "c", therefore he must be anti-"fill-in-your-premise-here".

Your argument is flawed.

This is sad to read

bro i nead ...

Begging doesn't help. Go around, read articles and post good replies.
As you give, so shall you receive.

However, what you are doing is called spam. And it will get your reputation put down.

bro i nead up vote plz......

Loading...

Just another hypocritical, self-serving, pussy-ass, scumbag...of late night T.V.

Our system may not be perfect, but socialize Medicine will let you die.

let's all share a vote on our blog @zuhrafriska