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

[Reba]

They could easily see that the two parents are genetically deaf according to their record (remember, we have historical documents after documents how doctors and professional who feel deaf people should be sterilized because they can make more deaf children) .

Right.

In the past, it might not have been possible to easily discern an infant's deafness or blindness at birth. But there were people who wanted to prevent by force of law the conception and eventual birth of deaf, blind, and other "imperfect" babies. That did happen.

 

[shel90]

OFC i do know what it means. I wouldnt be a former nurse or a medical billing and coding student currently if I didnt!. It means that for example, a baby born with no brain is not going to be able to survive no matter what measures were given to it. Satisfied?

Ok, now to move past my intelligence doubts, I can see that a deaf baby being thought of that way bothers you. But there was a point in time when a deaf baby was thought of this way. There was a point in time when a blind baby was thought of this way. There was a point in time when a downs syndrome baby was thought of this way.

Arent you so glad that they STOPPED thinking of these babies this way?

I can see that there are some babies born, such as one without a brain, where no amount of measures being taken would help the baby. However, based upon the fact that this baby managed to survive almost 2 hours on its own, based on the fact that to survive those 2 hours, it had to have functioning lungs *yet needing assistance to keep functioning* and a functioning heart, then this baby deserved a chance.

The thing is, we dont and probably never will know exactly what was wrong or not wrong with this baby. But we do KNOW, that this baby was born apparantly alive and breathing on its own and had a heartbeat. That alone should have been enough to give it at least a fighting chance.

Most of the time, technology is developed through trial and error. As long as the parents are being made aware that the baby may or may not live and are willing to put their babies through this, then I say give them a chance.

Some of the biggest medical breakthroughs were made simply because people were willing to take a chance on even the most riskiest propositions.

They had the means and the way to make that baby as comfortable as possible, WHILE trying to help the baby survive.


Now, I'm going to ask the impossible of all of you. Picture yourselves as that baby being born. Would you have wanted the chance at life? Or would you have wanted to be given up on without being given a chance at all?

Yes, I would want to give the baby a chance but like Jillio stated, we werent there so we have no idea what happened. I have stated before, all we can is speculate.

If the doctors refused to see the baby as the mother claimed, then something is wrong with the picture but until then, we are only getting one side of the story.

 

[deafskeptic]

Yes, I would want to give the baby a chance but like Jillio stated, we werent there so we have no idea what happened. I have stated before, all we can is speculate.

If the doctors refused to see the baby as the mother claimed, then something is wrong with the picture but until then, we are only getting one side of the story.

Well said. I've said in my earlier posts that I felt bad for the mother whose baby died but we have only her side.

 

[Reba]

Bear, the doctors and hospitals cannot comment because of patient privacy. Remember that Privacy Policy paper that you sign and no one ever reads? It governs the situations in which health providers can disclosed medical info and giving info to the media is not one of them. That's all that the health providers are saying. The mother can file a suit for negligence and she will have access to all of the medical records. If an arbitrator or jury finds negligence, the health providers will be held responsible.

I don't know if the privacy laws are the same in England.

Have you thought about the mother in this case. She may have mental issues. She's just been through a traumatic experience. Remember that the first stage is denial...

It happened almost one year ago. She should be past the denial stage by now.

One can only feel empathy for the mother and baby.

Oh, yes.

 

[jillio]

I don't know if the privacy laws are the same in England.


It happened almost one year ago. She should be past the denial stage by now.


Oh, yes.

"Should" and "is" are two completely different concepts. Also, we don't know if this woman had other mental health issues. Dealing with grief is a process, and can sometimes take years. It is not always a linear process.

 

[sallylou]

You're right, Reba. I forgot that this was in England. D'oh! I need more caffeine. I don't know what kind of national privacy laws they have in England.

 

[jillio]

International Data Privacy Laws by Country

 

[sallylou]

Jillio is the woman with the links. This applies to a person's personal information not just medical information. Notice that the US is glaringly absent. Anyone can sell any personal information about you and you can't stop it. The US only has the Privacy Act that applies to medical disclosure. This was created because medical providers were being sued for giving out information to unauthorized people.

 

[dreama]

I have no idea why would anyone want to condone this nor I understand them. I hope it will never happen to anyone else. Someone told me once, her friend who lived in England was pregnant with deaf baby and the doctor there asked her if she wanted to abort her child cuz the baby was deaf. I was alike "what!" It is same with some doctors here in America. I know one doctor pressured my future daughter in law's sister who is 8 months pregnant now with down syndrome baby. He gave her all negative and tell her that child will die once he is born then tell her the child will not live past 5 and so on and so on. Then tell her this child will never talk cuz of how severly ds he has. He pressured her to get abort her child. I am glad she decided to keep him. Some doctors are good but unfortunely we get sometime bad doctors.

I'm glad your friend didn't buckle under preasure. Some people with downs syndrome can write books. I know of all the presure tht parents of disabled are put under. It's really sad. Especially when some are not as strong as daughter in law's sister.

 

[dreama]

Ok here is my two cents on this arguement, whether if wanted or not. As stated earlier the baby could have been made comfortable regardless of whether if it lived or died, no matter what was wrong with this baby it still deserved a right to life. Many babies born at full gestation are born with a lot of severe handicaps and pain, what makes them any different than this one?

Jillio, you state that this thread is being made on assumptions without any medical facts to back it up. Ok, where are your facts that this baby would NOT have survived and done well if given the treatments? Wouldnt you say that you are also going on assumptions?

What gives anyone the right to decide who lives or who dies? Regardless, of what the odds may be? This baby deserved every chance that they could have given it. And STILL have been made comfortable without any undue pain or torture.

Well said!

 

[dreama]

Incompatable with life means that if left alone WILL die. A deaf or blind baby, left alone, will NOT die.

If I had been left alone at birth I would have died. Luckily I wasn't left to die. I was popped in an incubator so here I am today.

I am Deaf, blind, have petite mal epilepsy, thyroid deficency, mild asperger syndrome and have also suffered from mental health problems, yet I am very very thankful that the doctors gave me a chance of life. I would not have wanted it to be otherwise.

 

[dreama]

Yes, I would want to give the baby a chance but like Jillio stated, we werent there so we have no idea what happened. I have stated before, all we can is speculate.

If the doctors refused to see the baby as the mother claimed, then something is wrong.

I'm glad you feel that way.
Why do you think that the mother's story is not correct?
Bad things do happen in the NHS. I live in England. My mother died of cancer and I've had some really crappy experience with the NHS like the eye doctor not even examining my eye simply because I couldn't keep it open. They didn't consider doing me under anesthetic. I was trying very hard to prise the eye open but I have a severe sensitivity to light. After this I really don't have any problem believing the mother's side of the story.

 

[Cowpuppy]

I haven't yet figured out who's side you are on. In your attempt to create bashing material for 'you know who'.....it seems you are in fact advocating 'for' health care reform.
Repubs want to say it cost too much to reform it.....and yet Palin decries a death panel. The death panel you describe would be a 'budgeting' decision......or in other words.....another way to cut cost. It says that democrats want to use 'COMMON SENSE'. And what exactly is wrong with that????? You are arguing that we should not use common sense.
I don't have a problem with death panels......this country has become to much of a politically correct place. We have to please everyone of everyone is going to bytch.
Spoiled country....death is part of life....unfortunately that also includes infant births. Stillborns and premies have a long history.....more so than nowadays with pre-birth care. So why is it that we now expect perfection in everything. Other countries don't do this. Death is part of life to them. Very expensive for intensive care........maybe if we can get the cost down then the death panels become less needed....i.e. preventive care and lower intensive care cost.
The word death scares americans silly.
That is why Palin used the term.....political desperation to grab attention.
It works against her and the repubs if you think about it.
A death panel is just a sign of being frugal with cost. Nothing wrong with that.
I really doubt they pull plugs when a baby is pulling thru.
Simply hyperbole for the purpose of bashing.
Or is this all a hidden religious pro-life ploy?
As it is the taxpayers pay for plenty of these premmies in our system....so what is it you want?
Insurance and health care executives have a monopoly on everything....this is what jacks up prices. Less work more pay. And noone paying in cuz it is ridiculous rates.
They charge more because not enough paying in.
It's like a little store in a little town....the prices are high. They have to charge more to cover thier cost. Charge fewer people more money. Same with insurance and health care. If everyone buys then prices go down...like a Walmart store...lol. Economics 101.
But seriously, they want to do less for more money.

The Daily Mail reported that a woman in Great Britain was told it was against the rules under their nationalized health care plan to save her premature baby. Her baby was left to die.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...gives-birth-just-days-22-week-care-limit.html



It is a development issue but there are cases where premies born 21 and 22 weeks old survive only because of our advanced medical technology ensures that chance of survivability outside the womb.
Youngest Premature Baby's Survival Called a ‘Miracle' - February 21, 2007 - The New York Sun

Tiny Baby Has Bright Future - ABC News

The problem here, this "death panel" decided it wasn't worth trying yet we have a case of a premie born during the 21 week stage of development survived because of the doctors' willingness to help here in the United States. The G.B. doctors decided the money wouldn't be "well spent" to help a baby survive.

 

[jazzy]

I am looking for more proof of history of deaf babies being considered as incompatible with life.[/QUOTE] During roman time, they killed deaf and other handicap kids under age 3.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

I'm glad you feel that way.
Why do you think that the mother's story is not correct?
Bad things do happen in the NHS. I live in England. My mother died of cancer and I've had some really crappy experience with the NHS like the eye doctor not even examining my eye simply because I couldn't keep it open. They didn't consider doing me under anesthetic. I was trying very hard to prise the eye open but I have a severe sensitivity to light. After this I really don't have any problem believing the mother's side of the story.

Nobody said here that mother´s story is not correct.

We need to know doctor´s side why the doctor do that.

We have hard time to understand why she did not file a lawsuit against the doctor if she claim that the doctor "murder" her baby or "neglect" to save her baby´s life.

The doctor´s side will come to the public if she file a lawsuit against the doctor. The doctor is not allow to spread its patient´s privacy to the public unless she sue him....


For your information.

I born and raised in UK. I do not complaint anything about NHS because they were rushed to save my life several times before. I only had ONCE in my life is 2 long year waiting for tonsil removal. Yes, there´re waiting list for non-life treatening patients in UK .

My Dad got light stroke... They RUSHED to save his life... My step-mother got lung cancer... They RUSHED to save her life is do everything including chemo therapy but her lung cancer was too strong and beat chemo therapy, etc. They also save my best friend´s breast cancer as well. They also rushed to save my friend´s parents´s life as well.

Do I make doctors the responsible for the death of my step-mother? NO, because I know they tried their best to save her life what they can. You must have known that the people lost their battle to cancer...

Yes, I know that NHS is not perfect but we are still grateful what the doctors do their best what they can. It´s their job to save patient´s life. Many British people said that they would have die or very struggle with their life if they live in America because they can´t afford to pay expensive health insurance or very limited health insurance.

Yes, British people are right... I would recommend you to watch the movie "John Q". It show you the example about healthcare. We saw "Sicko", Michael Moore documented about healthcare...

I compared Sicko document film with American comments of their own experience... I must say that Sicko is very accurate document film.

 

[shel90]

I'm glad you feel that way.
Why do you think that the mother's story is not correct?
Bad things do happen in the NHS. I live in England. My mother died of cancer and I've had some really crappy experience with the NHS like the eye doctor not even examining my eye simply because I couldn't keep it open. They didn't consider doing me under anesthetic. I was trying very hard to prise the eye open but I have a severe sensitivity to light. After this I really don't have any problem believing the mother's side of the story.

Never said that it was incorrect but just only getting one side of the story.

 

[Jiro]

Nobody said here that mother´s story is not correct.

We need to know doctor´s side why the doctor do that.

We have hard time to understand why she did not file a lawsuit against the doctor if she claim that the doctor "murder" her baby or "neglect" to save her baby´s life.

The doctor´s side will come to the public if she file a lawsuit against the doctor. The doctor is not allow to spread its patient´s privacy to the public unless she sue him....


For your information.

I born and raised in UK. I do not complaint anything about NHS because they were rushed to save my life several times before. I only had ONCE in my life is 2 long year waiting for tonsil removal. Yes, there´re waiting list for non-life treatening patients in UK .

My Dad got light stroke... They RUSHED to save his life... My step-mother got lung cancer... They RUSHED to save her life is do everything including chemo therapy but her lung cancer was too strong and beat chemo therapy, etc. They also save my best friend´s breast cancer as well. They also rushed to save my friend´s parents´s life as well.

Do I make doctors the responsible for the death of my step-mother? NO, because I know they tried their best to save her life what they can. You must have known that the people lost their battle to cancer...

Yes, I know that NHS is not perfect but we are still grateful what the doctors do their best what they can. It´s their job to save patient´s life. Many British people said that they would have die or very struggle with their life if they live in America because they can´t afford to pay expensive health insurance or very limited health insurance.

Yes, British people are right... I would recommend you to watch the movie "John Q". It show you the example about healthcare. We saw "Sicko", Michael Moore documented about healthcare...

I compared Sicko document film with American comments of their own experience... I must say that Sicko is very accurate document film.

and I live in America for over 20 years and I must say Sicko is HALF-accurate.

 

[jillio]

and I live in America for over 20 years and I must say Sicko is HALF-accurate.

I find even half accurate disturbing when it comes to the topic.

 

[Jiro]

I find even half accurate disturbing when it comes to the topic.

yep. that's what Obama healthcare reform is focused on. hurry up and pass it, dammit! (without public option and mandatory insurance )

 

[jillio]

yep. that's what Obama healthcare reform is focused on. hurry up and pass it, dammit! (without public option and mandatory insurance )

Oh, you!:P