A dramatic scene was set. The epic debate over end-of-life issues reached a fever pitch across the ocean. 

After months of court battles in the United Kingdom, a judge ordered that Alfie Evans, a little boy just shy of two years old, be taken off life support. 

You haven’t heard the story? No surprise. I was following the story, but didn't see it among Facebook or Twitter's trending topics until Alfie died. Nor did the national news media pay much attention during the five days that Alfie shocked his doctors and was able to survive once his ventilator was removed. But survive he did. Alfie suffered from an unknown, undiagnosed neurodevelopmental disease that had left his brain in a state considered by his doctors to be brain dead. 

The idea that a state government can determine the date when your innocent child will die should send shivers up every spine. 

More from this author: 

In health care in the U.S., decisions about life and death and removal of life support are discussions made by the patient’s family, informed by physicians. However, the actual decision is made by the family — the parents, the children, the designated power of attorney — as opposed to being dictated by the state.

Little Alfie Evans fought hard in the week after his ventilator was removed. The hospital where he had been receiving care canceled their scheduled press conference the morning after the ventilator was removed.His parents fought for food and water for Alfie

Alfie was made an Italian citizen, with Italian pilots waiting (but not allowed) to bring Alfie to Italy, as a hospital there was ready to care for him. Oddly enough, the UK court would not allow this either. They also ruled against the parents taking Alfie home to care for him there in his final days. So literally, the state made the decision that they owned Alfie, Alfie was theirs. 

The story of Alfie Evans is beyond sad, hitting too close to home for any parent. Even with his parents offering to take Alfie elsewhere funded by private donations, no longer relying on a system of government health care, the state said no. 

The thought that the government can take control of a loved one because they are ill is unconscionable. Could this happen here? One can only guess that if the U.S. embarks upon government-run health care, indeed the government will be making decisions about the care that you and your family receives on a regular basis, not only at the end of life.

In these post-modern times with incredible technological advances that might provide hope for a patient such as Alfie, this case makes it clear that technology without empathy and compassion is a cold, soulless existence. 

The Hippocratic Oath, considered the earliest foundation of Western medical ethics, is based on the concept of "do no harm or injustice to" a patient, indicating a respect for life from heartbeat to final breath. 

A family needs the time and space to make the right decisions for them and their loved one.  Survival of the fittest may sound like a reasonable, intelligent idea until it is your family member sentenced to die. 

For those who believe that life is endowed by the Creator, all life has value. Certainly in America, our very own Declaration of Independence declares first a right to life, then liberty, and finally the pursuit of happiness. May we always defend that right here in the U.S. and continue to fight for the life and liberty of the oppressed around the world.

Jill Murphy is a physical therapist who lives in Neenah.  Her email address is

Read or Share this story: