Imagine for a moment that this disabled baby is probably going to have a very difficult life, require a lot of health care, will probably make no contribution to society, may not even ever be aware of what's going on, and may just die in a few years anyway. If the parents choose to try again and have a perfectly healthy child isn't that much better? In theory, by keeping the severely disabled baby they're denying a perfectly healthy baby the chance for a fruitful and enjoyable life.
I can't say now what I would do if I were the parent, but common sense and nature tells us which is the best all-round option.
2006-11-11 20:04:06 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
Imagine also for a moment that a genetic flaw appears in the populace, one that creates many severely disabled babies. If more and more are produced and kept by, let's face it, selfish parents, this could eventually cause the collapse of the health care system and society as a whole, as not enough healthy workers are produced to keep it viable.
2006-11-11 20:06:45 · update #1
Consider also all the money and resources that go into the care of such a baby (and later, child, and at an outside chance, young adult). All the normal people who will not get that operation, who will not get the drugs they need, because so many millions of tax-payers' money have been spent on keeping this one young person alive throughout their relatively short life. I would hate to think that my son was passed over for an operation because the surgeons were too busy looking after a terminally disabled child.
2006-11-11 22:11:15 · update #2
Your theory sounds perfectly reasonable. It's the sensible thing to do. But it's so much more difficult to pass judgement, once you have met a family in this situation. Nothing is ever black & white. I DO believe however, that the parents should have a huge say in how the doctors deal with resasitation, etc., especially if they want it all to stop.
I also think, that the aid in Africa should be controlled, because an increase in population completely destroys the nature there and the consequence is that the Africans speed up the growth of the deserts and eliminate their food supplies for the future. So it's the logical thing to do, but hey, letting thousands of cute African babies die...? Catch 22 again.
2006-11-11 20:19:27 · answer #1 · answered by Hipira 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's a screwed up situation. On the Discovery Health Channel they are profiling a baby "Born without a face." This baby was really screwed up looking when she was born and her face was a total mess. She will endure probably 20 operations throughout her life to build her a functional face that will still be horribly deformed and grotesque. She will never be accepted in society the way you and I are. Her dad is in the military so our taxpayer dollars that go to the military health insurance are paying the insane cost of all these operations. I know her life is going to suck a** and she will be emotionally damaged from all the painful operations she will have to endure as a young child, but I can't definitely say whether she should live that life or not. It's a really tough question because I think it's ingrained in us to give life a fighting chance. But at the same time you are right that it's a huge drain on the system and it takes a healthy human's place in a loving and comfy home.
2006-11-11 20:14:11 · answer #2 · answered by Reject187 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I am a great believer in letting nature take its coyrse and not interfering with nature but in this case, i think it should be up to the parents.
If they do not want their child to grow up having a difficult life due to disability then they should be allowed to let it die naturally,(as long as it is humane) however, if the parents are prepared to care for it and the medical care is there to allow it to live then they should be allowed to keep it.
I wouldnt agree with letting all severely disabled babies die regardless of the parents wishes.
2006-11-14 22:59:28 · answer #3 · answered by Catwhiskers 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The obvious solution is to let nature take its course rather than wasting the scarce NHS resources on a baby that will only ever have a short abnormal existence.
This policy could be extended to Downs babies. Parents who say how much pleasure they get from bringing up such children selfishly consume NHS and local authority resources maintaining a creature that will never be independent. If parents had to fund these children themselves, they may take a different view.
2006-11-11 20:19:01 · answer #4 · answered by Clive 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think this was a very unfair question for you to put forward. Who are we to judge for the family that is living this nightmare. As a parent I can't imagine a more difficult decision to make. But you have chosen to lower it to the level of a wolf pack who will force the deformed outside their realm of security and let nature take its course. I heard and understood every word you said but we are not animals, we are suppose to be humans.
2006-11-11 20:30:41 · answer #5 · answered by patti duke 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
i think of its thoroughly as much as the dad and mom. in the event that they have a assure of that significant of ideas harm and the toddler can not proceed to exist with out suggestions from machines they could be allowed to permit that toddler die quietly and of direction. No rationalization why every physique could go through for twenty years. the difficulty with human beings right this moment is they don't prefer to settle for that dying is as lots of a ingredient of existence as the different concern you will bypass by using.
2016-10-17 04:29:51 · answer #6 · answered by swindler 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
most disabilities you can not judge that. downs syndrom you can see at birth. but down syndrom people can have productive lives. physically disabled I have disablility and think god did this for a reason. I am a better person for it.
I do have doubts about anceleptic babies. they can not survive. They can exist for a while but they can not survive and there is no conciousness. i would say humane thing is to not interfere and let them go peacefully
2006-11-13 18:25:44 · answer #7 · answered by Miss Johny 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It may be tougher when you actually see that creation that you've made. But if you could know what he/she is thinking. . . . .
I just imagine me when I am very old and sick, i would just say "pull the plug", and that would be natural. But then again I would have lived a full life. . . .
but no more pain and suffering
2006-11-11 20:11:29 · answer #8 · answered by mary j 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As horrible as it sounds, I think you're right. Disabled babies are a part of natural selection, and they should be allowed to die off naturally.
I'm glad someone else thinks like this, I was afraid I was the only one. I feel less heartless now, thanks!
2006-11-11 20:07:18 · answer #9 · answered by lilgiggle33 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
good question .i know somebody who had this dilemma 4 years ago.they where told the baby was so severely disabled she would not live past 1 .she is now 4.every one deserves a right to live
2006-11-11 20:08:14 · answer #10 · answered by teabag 1968 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋