17 month old baby to be killed.

[Grand_Duchess-Elizaveta]

This just makes me want to cry. Another Terry Shiavo case, only worse.

I just want to state that I do not see quality of life or chances of long term survival to be the issue here. To me, the real issue is about who is allowed to decide who lives and who dies, and how quality of life is really determined.

I hope the removal of support doesn't happen, but I am not optimistic.

 

[E.C.]

Lord have mercy on the child and the murderers.

 

[EricTheRed]

I have no idea what to think in these cases. When machines do the living I dont know if that is really God's plan. I will just keep out of this I guess.

 

[Jacob4707]

I have no idea what to think in these cases. When machines do the living I dont know if that is really God's plan. I will just keep out of this I guess.

Ditto.

 

[repentant]

Ditto.

Tritto..

 

[Protoevangel]

Just an observation...

With great means comes great responsibility.


Lord have mercy.

 

[SeraphimSarov]

I don't feel there's any question here. The family wants him alive. End of story.

May the Lord have mercy.

 

[Philothei]

Lord have mercy on us and everyone involved in the decision making.

God bless,
Philothei

 

[Grand_Duchess-Elizaveta]

I don't feel there's any question here. The family wants him alive. End of story.

May the Lord have mercy.

This is my feeling as well. Whether or not it is God's will for a person to live should not be left up to godless hospital executives. It sounds like they aren't even 100% sure of the diagnosis yet. The mother of this child, for whatever medical reason, cannot have anymore children, so I understand her reluctance to let the child go.

It looks like we're moving closer to the Dutch child/baby euthanasia plan. I guess it's a logical progression. If we think it's okay to kill babies in utero because they are not viable outside the womb, then it's not much of a jump to say it's okay to kill them if they are not viable after birth.

 

[Shubunkin]

That is terrible, and then I have to wonder how many of these cases get missed by the media?

By the way, I think what is awful too is the "Do not resusitate" order that hospitals have. I think few people know what that really means.

 

[Jacob4707]

Not to throw a monkey wrench into this, but until the early or mid-twentieth century, death was a common part of life. (As an aside, I read somewhere that until the invention of antibiotics around WW II, most medicine before that time was "the placebo effect.") And for a Christian, death was not a tragedy to be avoided or prevented at all costs. I have never been in the situation these parents are in or that of the many parents who face the opposite situation - i.e., they believe that it's time to "let go," but laws and procedures prevent them from turning off the artificial life support systems. To what extent do we want government officials making these decisions or passing all-encompassing laws that are at times too generic or all-encompassing and tie the hands of either the caregivers or the family members or the professionals?

By the way, I think what is awful too is the "Do not resusitate" order that hospitals have. I think few people know what that really means.

As I understand it, patients have the right to request "do not resuscitate" for themselves if they don't want extraordinary means used to keep them alive: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_not_resuscitate. I do not see anything wrong with this, esp. when it's the patient's request, and I don't know that I would be adamantly against others who have the legal right to order this doing so.

 

[Orthosdoxa]

As a mother, I cannot imagine what that poor woman is going through.

I don't think hospitals should be the ones making those decisions.

This gets into an awfully gray area, but the kid isn't brain dead. Neither was Terri Schiavo. That to me is the litmus test that this isn't even a life anymore, just machines doing stuff to a dead body.

He's a person, and why should any person be denied treatments that are available? I definitely think the family should have a say in this. I would do the exact same thing if it were my kid.

 

[Protoevangel]

Not to throw a monkey wrench into this, but until the early or mid-twentieth century, death was a common part of life. (As an aside, I read somewhere that until the invention of antibiotics around WW II, most medicine before that time was "the placebo effect.") And for a Christian, death was not a tragedy to be avoided or prevented at all costs. I have never been in the situation these parents are in or that of the many parents who face the opposite situation - i.e., they believe that it's time to "let go," but laws and procedures prevent them from turning off the artificial life support systems. To what extent do we want government officials making these decisions or passing all-encompassing laws that are at times too generic or all-encompassing and tie the hands of either the caregivers or the family members or the professionals?

If we have the means to save a life, and we intentionally withhold those means, we are in effect, killing... murdering. That's why I say "with great means comes great responsibility". One can use all of the arguments one wants to, to defend murder (or the PC name 'euthanasia'), but it is really that simple. It’s not easy, and perhaps (most likely) we would be better off without the technology... But never again will I use my words to justify murder.

I know you aren't knowingly defending murder. It is a tough issue, and one that can get muddied and confused very easily.

 

[Jacob4707]

That's a very "scholarly" way to look at it, I suppose. If we have the means to save a life, and we intentionally withhold those means, we are in effect, killing... murdering. That's why I say "with great means comes great responsibility". You can use all of the "scholarly" arguments you want, to defend murder (or the PC name 'euthanasia'), but it is really that simple. It’s not easy, and perhaps (most likely) we would be better off without the technology... But never again will I use my words to justify murder.

It's not "scholarly." It's not even scholarly without the quotes.

 

[Protoevangel]

It's not "scholarly." It's not even scholarly without the quotes.

Sorry. That was unnecessarily confrontational of me. I hope my edit makes my post less so.

 

[Shubunkin]

Not to throw a monkey wrench into this, but until the early or mid-twentieth century, death was a common part of life. (As an aside, I read somewhere that until the invention of antibiotics around WW II, most medicine before that time was "the placebo effect.") And for a Christian, death was not a tragedy to be avoided or prevented at all costs. I have never been in the situation these parents are in or that of the many parents who face the opposite situation - i.e., they believe that it's time to "let go," but laws and procedures prevent them from turning off the artificial life support systems. To what extent do we want government officials making these decisions or passing all-encompassing laws that are at times too generic or all-encompassing and tie the hands of either the caregivers or the family members or the professionals?



As I understand it, patients have the right to request "do not resuscitate" for themselves if they don't want extraordinary means used to keep them alive: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_not_resuscitate. I do not see anything wrong with this, esp. when it's the patient's request, and I don't know that I would be adamantly against others who have the legal right to order this doing so.

It's an awful order in some cases. My father-in-law is a case in point. His heart stopped last Christmas, and his wife said "do not resusitate" and his grandson insisted they do. It consisted of a hard blow to his chest with a fist (doctor's of course) and it revived him. "Do not resusitate" is an order to not revive in any case. Would you really want this? He is fine now, and thank God our son was there to insist he be resusitated.

Don't believe what you read on Wikipedia, as not everything is included in their "definition" of things.