November 2010

S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930    

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Wednesday, December 1st, 2004 11:23 am
I am having a hard time processing this....

http://cnn.aimtoday.cnn.com/news/story.jsp?idq=/ff/story/0001%2F20041130%2F1754217753.htm&sc=1103&photoid=20010410NY190

EDIT: [AS IN] I can't seem to form an opinion on this subject as presented in the article. I don't know whether or not to be for it or against it - for this specific ideal.
Wednesday, December 1st, 2004 05:46 pm (UTC)
I haven't formed an opinion yet... it is hard for me to process. I support legal human euthanasia when the person is able to make a decision about their own situation. I always think of the worse when 'others' make the decision for them - as in the case of children. People might do it for insurance money or other horrible reason.

Also, medicine is always changing. 15 years ago a child with leukemia had a 10% chance of survival - now that chance is 85%. But that is here is the US not in a third world county? Does that allow those parents to make that sort of decision when it wouldn't even have to be though about in the US?

I just don't know.
Wednesday, December 1st, 2004 05:50 pm (UTC)
I guess I was reading the situation there as legalizing euthanasia for babies who will have to live on life support their whole lives, or who are severely deformed and in pain, not just ill children, since the doctor in the article was saying it would only affect about 10 cases a year. It would be a hard thing to regulate. You'd have to rely heavily on doctors making ethical recommendations. I hadn't thought about the insurance angle. I just can't conceive of people who would hurt someone else for money, so it didn't occur to me. :(
Wednesday, December 1st, 2004 05:58 pm (UTC)
I think that the article focuses on infants but unfortunately I always think of ...where will this lead to next? Because that's how laws change, by thinking of the next logical step. If you allow the process for an infant on life support what about the two year old, or the three year old?

I hate it but some time I think the worst of what human kind can do. I try not to read the news because I can't get images of human cruelty out of my head. Like the mom, who cut her baby's arms off, in 'post partum depression'. That stuff make me ill... this issue, I have no idea.

I think that responsible parents should have the choice. I also think we should be at a place, medically, that we should know that there is a problem before the baby is born or even before the 3 month abortion cut off date so decision can be made before birth. That is my opinion but it is hard to say.
Wednesday, December 1st, 2004 06:02 pm (UTC)
Unfortunately, the late-term abortion procedures available to the mother of a child with spina bifida are far more cruel and painful than an injection of sedatives after birth. And prior to the last trimester it can be very difficult to diagnose.
Wednesday, December 1st, 2004 06:04 pm (UTC)
See... more information I just didn't know.

ACK! this forming an opinion thing is hard than it looks! :)
Thursday, December 2nd, 2004 01:20 am (UTC)
Doing it for the insurance money won't work, though I think people might still try because people are blaring idiots.
Life insurance will not cover intentional death, be it suicide or euthanasia. And often, life insurance will not cover infants because there's suspicion there from the get go.