in pregnacies in particular. for example in holland until recently if a baby was born at 24 weeks then they would let them die instead of giving the baby the care it needs. also if the baby is found to be disabled during pregnancy should we allow the state to intervien and make the expectant mother to abort. i think not, what are your views on this subject?
2006-09-18 02:50:37 · 12 answers · asked by sam87_6 1 in Pregnancy & Parenting ➔ Pregnancy
there is no way the goevernment should be allowed to decide which kids get to live or die. just because it is premature, even at 24 weeks, that doesn't mean that the baby is going to be unable to have ahealthy productive, happy life. my mother has taken care of 1000's of kids in a neonatal intesive care unit and a good portion of those were preemies. i would guess that somewhere around 90% of those kids are normal, healthy people with no health problems or disabilities. and just because a kid has a physical or mental disability doesn't make them less deserving of a chance at life. there is absolutely no circumstance that i can think of that the government should be able to tell a person that their child is not allowed to live.
2006-09-18 03:00:51 · answer #1 · answered by buhing513 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I feel that is the womans decision I had a baby at 23 weeks in the state of MASS and he is now a 13 year old young man. Yes the doctors did give hints to let him just pass and take all the breathing machines off, but my believe is if God wants him he will take him, yes he does having learning disabilities due to his prematurity but he loves you just like any other child would. The state has not right to demand what a woman does with her body or the child.
2006-09-18 09:55:51 · answer #2 · answered by kim12074 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that since in the UK the National Health Service is provided by the state then the state has the right to intervene in what is done. However, not in the way you mention - as there is a strong ethic in medicine in this country to try to save life if possible - not to allow such babies to die. Maybe the Dutch way would be better - which is more along the lines of survival of the fittest. But it must always be difficult to draw the line eg is a baby with a hare-lip disabled? - or one with one leg a bit shorter than the other - or missing one or two fingers? Or with ginger hair (only kidding)?
2006-09-18 09:58:21 · answer #3 · answered by big pup in a small bath 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If there is a medical reason that may affect both mother and unborn child should medical issue should intervein.But if the baby comes to early they should try everything they can to save the babies life if they can't then they must let him/her pass on.
2006-09-18 09:56:58 · answer #4 · answered by keishahayes2003 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hell no. Just because a child is disabled doesn't mean that it can just be killed. I think that's horrible. I also think that it's horrible to let a 24 weeker die. I know pleanty, and I mean PLEANTY of 24 weekers that have lived and are now growing like a normal kid.
2006-09-18 09:59:31 · answer #5 · answered by E's Mommy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No way. The government has no right to tell me what to do with my body or my baby.
2006-09-18 13:00:25 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It shouldn't be up to them. The only person that knows what they want are the people that go through this.
2006-09-18 10:55:37 · answer #7 · answered by carolinexx 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The state has no business is the medical lives of me or mine.
NO business.
2006-09-18 09:54:19 · answer #8 · answered by amosunknown 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
its the woman thats pregnant not the state i would tell them to go to hell and give them directions
2006-09-18 10:31:19 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
l
2006-09-18 10:19:45 · answer #10 · answered by momie_2bee 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋