The Circle of Kindness Foundation is encouraged to broaden its protections beyond children and consider adults in their late twenties, not just the pediatric population. This suggestion comes from experts at the Institute of Hematology, Immunology and Cell Technologies of the Center named after socialbites.ca, where Dima Rogachev Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences Alexey Maschan weighs in on long-term patient care. He points out a gap in many charitable efforts that concentrate on younger patients, leaving adult survivors without continued support as they transition out of pediatric programs.
Meanwhile, the Goodness Foundation Foundation has a strong track record of assisting children with serious illnesses, including rare diseases, by ensuring access to necessary treatments. Yet there is a recognized need for ongoing therapy as young patients mature into adults, since some adults continue to require treatment that the foundation may not cover once childhood care ends.
Maschan explains that effective childhood therapy can extend life into adulthood, enabling individuals to reach ages when they are formally considered adults. This is precisely the period when the current funding structures often reduce or halt support. The result is a potential loss of the life-saving benefits those early interventions produced, underscoring a potential misalignment between initial pediatric success and long-term welfare.
The hematologist notes that expanding the Circle of Kindness Foundation to include individuals under 25, or perhaps under 30, could help bridge this gap. He suggests that future state-backed programs might be needed to ensure access to treatments for orphan diseases, given that private earnings rarely meet the high costs of such therapies. His perspective reflects a broader concern about sustaining patient gains achieved through early medical interventions as people age.
In his view, a more inclusive approach could ensure that the life-quality improvements gained during childhood are not lost when patients become adults. The idea is not to replace existing pediatric efforts but to supplement them with a continuum of care that follows patients across the lifespan. This would involve coordinated funding and policy support to guarantee that adults who require ongoing therapy are not left without resources.
The discussion also touches on the practical realities of donor health when participating in life-saving procedures. Maschan, who has worked on bone marrow donation, notes the health implications for donors and the importance of safeguarding donor well-being while expanding medical access for recipients. He emphasizes that donor safety must remain a priority as programs broaden their reach and duration of support for patients who rely on such therapies.
Overall, the conversation highlights a shared goal: to create a seamless, sustained pathway from pediatric treatment to adult care. By recognizing the needs of those who mature from pediatric to adult patients, foundations can better align with evolving medical costs and social support systems. The result would be a more resilient network capable of helping people live longer, healthier lives, with steady access to the therapies that have already proven effective in childhood. The implication is clear: ongoing commitment from charitable organizations, along with thoughtful public policy, could close gaps that currently leave adults without essential treatments after their early successes.