I guess the risk of severe health problems goes along with preemies that young. What do you think?
2006-11-15 18:12:34 · 9 answers · asked by mamadixie 7 in Pregnancy & Parenting ➔ Pregnancy
Just an extension of the attitudes having to do with abortion.
2006-11-15 18:15:13 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
anywhere the baby has no chance at that age. In the USA a baby needs to be 27 weeks to have good fighting chance. 22 weeks even with life extending measure has less then a 5% chance if they do make it they are very damaged it's more kind to not let them suffer thru surgery and life as a vegetable it's actually more human to let them pass on. I've lost a pregnancy i would rather my child go then be put Thur all those painful medical procedure and still not be normal or even have a chance of being okay.
2006-11-16 02:24:29 · answer #2 · answered by ally'smom 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I have not heard of this, but I am happy they don't do this in the US because I would not have my niece if they did this here. Her mother had her between 20-24 weeks and she is OK and no problems in her life with her health, she is 20 years old and she is doing great, I think you should give any life a fighting chance if that life doesn't go on then you know you tried to do what you can, but to assume that the baby will have health problems and any other bad things is wrong. England is not God and only he can make that decision about life and what will come out of it. Maybe they should think about that.
2006-11-16 02:55:40 · answer #3 · answered by msleya2002 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
That applies to the UK, not just England...there is a difference, and not everone agrees with it....also, if there wasn't so much litigation in the US it appears that it would be the same there...
"In the US, as in the UK, euthanasia is not permitted, but some premature babies are allowed to die naturally. Many US doctors fear litigation and so are more reluctant to withdraw treatment than in the UK, Whitelaw notes."
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn10577-when-premature-babies-should-be-allowed-to-die.html
2006-11-16 02:28:59 · answer #4 · answered by sarch_uk 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think its sad for the family that has a premature baby and cant keep them, but good for the child. So many premature babies die or live half lives filled with no hearing/seeing, constant meds and not being able to function unless on a machine. I think its a good law, but it will be heart breaking for the woman who has that child.
2006-11-16 02:15:26 · answer #5 · answered by Jess 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I'm an American. I'm assuming "22 weeks saved" means 22 weeks premature. Personally, I believe every life is worth fighting for. Babies have survived being born that young. It's scary, it's a challenge, but more importantly, it's a life.
2006-11-16 02:18:41 · answer #6 · answered by munkees81 6 · 0⤊ 5⤋
I think that is stupid. When born that early they really don't have much luck anyway but they should still try. I know the pain of losing a baby and it is the worst thing anyone can ever go through. I hope they don't pass that or consider it.
2006-11-16 02:15:34 · answer #7 · answered by jennifer0208 2 · 1⤊ 4⤋
take time to read why they are asking to stop saving babies at 22weeks and under!!!!!
2006-11-16 02:19:08 · answer #8 · answered by mum_2_many 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
It sounds really cruel...dont have a baby in england...
2006-11-16 02:16:37 · answer #9 · answered by cutenwild1769 5 · 1⤊ 5⤋