Brain tumour 5 year old taken by parents

If I remember correctly the proton beam therapy focuses it's treatment into a very specific area, but the radiotherapy treats a more generalised area. The NHS consultant thought that the radiotherapy treatment was a more appropriate form of treatment and for the young lads condition than the photon beam therapy, of which the benefits were unproven.

Mmmm. I think the benefits of proton beam therapy are pretty well known. Many countries have it and we are now building one of our own. I suspect it was more to do with the cost.

Of course we'll never know if he would have done just as well with radiotherapy.

Anyway he seems to be doing well, that's the main thing.

Mmmm. I think the benefits of proton beam therapy are pretty well known. Many countries have it and we are now building one of our own. I suspect it was more to do with the cost.

 

Of course we'll never know if he would have done just as well with radiotherapy.

Anyway he seems to be doing well, that's the main thing.

No, it was about the appropriate treatment.

The parents disagreed with the NHS consultant, even though the benefits of proton beam treatment in cases of medulloblastomas were unproven. Also, in the patient's situation where the tumour can be spread by the CSF, there was a need for the radiotherapy over a wide area so the benefits of the proton beam therapy were limited, because it would still need to given over a wide area and potentially causing damage..

The NHS consultant still applied for funding for the proton beam therapy, but due to the clinical reasons stated above it was denied, which lead to the horrible situation occurring.

Read the Honourable Justice Baker's review of the situation here.

I'm so pleased this little boy has come through this and is on the mend.

No, it was about the appropriate treatment.

 

The parents disagreed with the NHS consultant, even though the benefits of proton beam treatment in cases of medulloblastomas were unproven. Also, in the patient's situation where the tumour can be spread by the CSF, there was a need for the radiotherapy over a wide area so the benefits of the proton beam therapy were limited, because it would still need to given over a wide area and potentially causing damage..

 

The NHS consultant still applied for funding for the proton beam therapy, but due to the clinical reasons stated above it was denied, which lead to the horrible situation occurring.

 

Read the Honourable Justice Baker's review of the situation here.

If this was so, and I've no reason to suppose it wasn't, why do you think the parents didn't believe it? (serious question) Do you think people are less trusting of people in high places than they once were, and if so, why?

The parents now say that Ashya is free from cancer

I doubt that any doctor worth his salt has actually told this boys parents that he is 'free from cancer' and cured. This is something that should never be said as far as cancer is concerned.

They will have been told that he is in remission but told that there is a possibility that the cancer will return.

I doubt that any doctor worth his salt has actually told this boys parents that he is 'free from cancer' and cured. This something that should never be said as far as cancer is concerned.

They will have been told that he is in remission but told that there is a possibility that the cancer will return.

I think I recall hearing something to that affect (ie that it may return) attributed to the doctors who treated him with the Proton Beam system. It was on a news I heard on the radio. They seemed to be playing it down - or managing expectations.

The family are still in Spain, and say they are afraid to come home, fearing that Social Services will take their children from them.

If its their wish to have their son spending quality time with family so be it theres no crime in that.

So glad the kid is getting better but it's concerning to think our precious world class world beating best thing since sliced bread don't dare ever criticise it NHS could have directly contributed to a child's death had they succeeded in forcing their own sub standard or less effective treatment on a patient against the will of the parents.

So glad the kid is getting better but it's concerning to think our precious world class world beating best thing since sliced bread don't dare ever criticise it NHS could have directly contributed to a child's death had they succeeded in forcing their own sub standard or less effective treatment on a patient against the will of the parents.

I posted this on the previous page, but here goes again.

Let's remember that under the NHS's consultant, the young boy was expected to survive. The argument was centred around the boy receiving expensive treatment abroad that research said may not have been as effective as the treatment that was offered under the NHS.

Read the review into the case here: https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/judgment-ashya-king-08092014.pdf