Premature baby not allowed to live under G.B. nationalized health care plan

Status
Not open for further replies.
shel90 said:
The fact is NONE of us were there and NONE of us know all the details so all we can do is speculate.
Click to expand...
Just another of those hot button topics where we draw the line in the sand and see who goes where. Seems like so many of these topics are posted to divide members. I am guilty as anyone. Debate is fine, but using speculation as a platform for opinions is a very tricky slope.
 
That is the view of Peter Singer, an "ethicist" at Princeton University. He wrote often that all disabled fetus must be removed. the group NotYetDead protested against him in the past. Liberals gushed and applauded when endowed chairs were established for animal rights at Harvard and Yale Law Schools...


dreama said:
Well said.

I would never have lasted 2 hours when I was born.
Yet here I am in relatively good health.

It's depressing how people will condone a baby of any age dying of medical neglicance in this way. As I said before, it's just blatent discrimination. That's all there is to it.
Click to expand...
 
kokonut said:
Indeed, the puerile "attacking" continues....thanks for joining CJB.

Bottom line, if the article is correct in its story then the doctors never bothered to look to see if the baby has a liver or not. Or even offered medical asst of any kind. Yet you don't need to be a doctor to see that for a baby to survive nearly two hours breathing on his own is something that can NOT easily be dismissed no matter how you justify it. That's what I'm looking at. Just as I have presented a few cases of micro-preemies born in a similar time of gestation at 22 weeks who survived and grew up only because of medical intervention. And that the fact that it took place in the United States and not G.B. tells the bigger story here.
Click to expand...

Provides us with the medical facts or STFU.
 
It take someone to open their mouth for people to look into it. If people were silent all the time, no one would research on it.
 
Lighthouse77 said:
It take someone to open their mouth for people to look into it. If people were silent all the time, no one would research on it.
Click to expand...

Problem is, there is no research going on. Just a lot of speculation without fact.
 
jillio said:
Provides us with the medical facts or STFU.
Click to expand...

Let's not get personal here.

The story as it went seemed very straight-forward. You have two people saying the baby lived for almost two hours...*unassissted*...breathing on his own. Then you have the fact the baby was born under 22 weeks, just shy of the 22 weeks requirement set by the state allowing doctors to assist. It didn't come out like a blob of worthless tissue but a living and apparently breathing baby struggling to live. I've given a few cases of babies born in the 22 weeks range that survived with the help of doctors and medical technology. The only difference, the cases I shown took place in the U.S. with no limit on gestation time versus G.B. that followed the rules of politicians who made the decision for them (of course, doctors had their input to but the point is they drew a line in the sand) that, quite seemingly so, cost the life of a young baby boy his death.
 
kokonut said:
Let's not get personal here.

The story as it went seemed very straight-forward. You have two people saying the baby lived for almost two hours...*unassissted*...breathing on his own.
Click to expand...

That's still only part of the picture. That in and of itself isn't proof enough the baby will survive.
 
The baby deserved medical attention. That's unquestionable. Almost two hours...unassisted....lived that long. Even if he only lived on his own for 20 minutes he would still need help. It's a 100% guarantee the baby will die unassisted but at least a chance for survival if he had the medical assistence needed would certainly help improve the odds.
 
Given that the British had have given exceptions for 20-23 weeks old premature infants. I would say there is more at play.

Maybe they didn't have the proper equipment? Maybe they didn't have staff on-board to handle it? Maybe they couldn't transfer them to another clinic or hospital? There are too many variables.

I know that when I was born, me and my mom had to be transferred to another hospital because the one she was originally admitted to didn't have the proper equipment.
 
kokonut said:
Let's not get personal here.

The story as it went seemed very straight-forward. You have two people saying the baby lived for almost two hours...*unassissted*...breathing on his own. Then you have the fact the baby was born under 22 weeks, just shy of the 22 weeks requirement set by the state allowing doctors to assist. It didn't come out like a blob of worthless tissue but a living and apparently breathing baby struggling to live. I've given a few cases of babies born in the 22 weeks range that survived with the help of doctors and medical technology. The only difference, the cases I shown took place in the U.S. with no limit on gestation time versus G.B. that followed the rules of politicians who made the decision for them (of course, doctors had their input to but the point is they drew a line in the sand) that, quite seemingly so, cost the life of a young baby boy his death.
Click to expand...

Why not? You are personally making assumptions regarding the medical status of this infant without sufficient knowledge or fact to do so. You are personally making it all about this infant. So, personally, supply the medical facts upon which you have based your assumptions, or we can all take them for exactly what they are. A bunch of hot air.
 
kokonut said:
The baby deserved medical attention. That's unquestionable. Almost two hours...unassisted....lived that long. Even if he only lived on his own for 20 minutes he would still need help. It's a 100% guarantee the baby will die unassisted but at least a chance for survival if he had the medical assistence needed would certainly help improve the odds.
Click to expand...

Supoort it with medical fact, "I'm not a doctor, but I play one on AD." Oftentimes, palliative care is the only option ethical and reasonable.
 
CJB said:
That's still only part of the picture. That in and of itself isn't proof enough the baby will survive.
Click to expand...

Especially not without test results such as blood gases.
 
souggy said:
Given that the British had have given exceptions for 20-23 weeks old premature infants. I would say there is more at play.

Maybe they didn't have the proper equipment? Maybe they didn't have staff on-board to handle it? Maybe they couldn't transfer them to another clinic or hospital? There are too many variables.

I know that when I was born, me and my mom had to be transferred to another hospital because the one she was originally admitted to didn't have the proper equipment.
Click to expand...

They've always say that America is more advanced when it come to this. Which why infant death is higher here than elsewhere. I mean babies are born premature and kept alive using advanced technologies, but some don't make it.
 
Let's not get personal here by targeting individuals for making opinions based on a article.

More story on this...

'My son could have been saved, but doctors simply chose not to,' says the 23-year-old from Farnmouth.

'It's horrendous. The doctors even refused to assess him. They said he was stillborn even though he was moving around in front of me, turning his head and waving his hands.

'If they had just put him in an incubator I'd have been happy - I wouldn't necessarily have wanted invasive treatment, only for him to receive some care.

'But they wouldn't, so while I battled desperately to keep Jayden warm with blankets, outside my room three incubators lay empty. We think he died from the cold, because premature babies can't hold their own heat.
.
.
'I said "If he's born alive you have to help him," but the doctor just replied "No, we don't. He isn't a baby - until 22 weeks he's a foetus. So we don't have to help."
.
.
'The midwife cut the cord and said the movement might just be a reflex reaction, but when she checked she confirmed he had a heartbeat and was breathing.

'She asked me if I wanted to hold him, but I was too scared of hurting him so she brought him over, stroked his arm and said he was perfect and that I wouldn't damage him.'

Sarah assumed that since her son was breathing and moving, doctors would now help him - clearly he couldn't be considered a miscarried foetus. And he was large for his gestation, measuring 28 cm, the size of a 23-week-old.

'I was overcome with panic - pleading with the midwives to help. I thought the doctors would save him because he was doing so well - he even urinated, which showed that his organs were functioning.

'But when one midwife went to the special care unit to ask, she returned crying and stood in the door shaking her head. I asked "Are the doctors coming?" and she said "Just make the best of your time with him."
Click to expand...

Doctors said I'd had a miscarriage and did nothing as my premature baby fought for life | Mail Online

The dangers of drawing a line.

Looks like that guy put up a hell of a fight....on his own.
 
Doctors finally came to see Sarah, but their attitude only angered her more.
'They said "Sorry about your miscarriage" while I was holding my son in my arms - it was infuriating that they wouldn't even acknowledge he was a live baby. They kept referring to him as a foetus.

'I was told I couldn't have a birth certificate as it was a miscarriage, but when the doctor left the midwife went and found the policy that stated if an adequate attempt at life had been made then the child is entitled to a birth certificate.

'I was very lucky because without that he might have been taken to the hospital incinerator and denied a funeral.'

Click to expand...

Doctors said I'd had a miscarriage and did nothing as my premature baby fought for life | Mail Online
 
Denied a funeral? It's her baby!! Not the govt! Not the hospital. It's her decision on what to do with the remains of her own baby. Lucky for her to get that birth cert.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top