Sometimes the most important principles of a news story are the ones rarely mentioned. When we compare the death of Alfie Evans to Charlie Gard, we see the loss of parental control. And when we contrast his situation to the royal prince (Louis Arthur Charles) we see the danger of socialized medicine.

Over a week ago, the news dutifully reported that young Alfie Evans died because his parents were denied the opportunity to obtain treatment in Italy. Last year it was Charlie Gard who was taken off life support by the British court system and prevented from seeking medical treatment in America. These two cases will become the precedent that confirms that the state (not the parents) have control of sick children.

The British court system removed parental control and placed it in the hands of British bureaucrats. It is one thing when a government steps in when parents prevent children from receiving life-saving treatment. It is quite another when the government prevents parents from pursuing life-saving treatment for their child.

Consider the contrast of the death of Alfie Evans with the birth of the prince. If Louis Charles was born with some medical condition, don’t you think that the royal family would do anything they could to save the child? It is hard to imagine the British court system getting involved at all. His treatment would be the exception. Alfie Evans and Charlie Gard are the rule.

Sick children in a socialized medical system cannot be allowed to leave. Others might be ready to leave the system, and that would damage the system. And if any of these sick children were cured it would reflect badly on the medical experts and the British bureaucrats. So parents cannot be allowed to take their children to another country, even if the parents or the other country pay for it.

During this political season, various candidates are talking about further governmental control of health care. We need to ask them if the stories of sick children in England illustrate what they are advocating for America.