Comments on: GRONINGEN REDUX

By: Fatal

Fatal — Wed, 13 Jul 2005 15:53:13 +0000

Maybe we can just keep all these brainless and malformed children alive long enough for the medical labs to utilize them instead of monkeys, dogs or rats.

I mean, afterall, if a living thing cannot be “like us” then its life isn’t really worthwhile, is it?

/sarc

How do people reconcile such antagonistic moral positions within themselves? Save the animals, kill the babies - I don’t get it.

Just call me an absolutist, at least my beliefs are consistent and not subject to the latest moralistic whim (or- God forbid, Scientific breakthrough?! Who wants to be the last parent to kill their down’s baby or spina bifida baby the day before a complete cure is announced?)

By: Watseka Burnout

Watseka Burnout — Wed, 13 Jul 2005 13:52:03 +0000

Rick dammit..why did you have to post this? Its sad and I hope it is a decision none of us have to ever ever make.

By: And Rightly So! » Who decides?

And Rightly So! » Who decides? — Wed, 13 Jul 2005 11:37:33 +0000

[...] isn’t who we would all think (parents, doctors, nurses and Insurance company reps). My concern with the adoption in the United States of any Groningen-type guideli [...]

By: Raven

Raven — Wed, 13 Jul 2005 11:24:56 +0000

Awesome, Rick.

Another part of this issue is…the insurance companies input. THEY do have a huge say in what infants are allowed to die. Trust me on this.

Babies who are born without the brain really present a tough choice for everyone involved. They usually don’t live very long even with life supports in place.
If they have even a small segment though, they can live for many years, and with therapies they can exist in a semi-coma state. Is this life valuable? I don’t have the answer to that. And I’m not the one to ask…only the parents should answer it. Like you say, so many chose death.
Spina Bifida is no where near the same. These babies can grow up and live a good life and even become useful to society. Yes, they need supports and nursing/medical care. I work with several SB children and young adults. The older ones hold down jobs.

Who answers for the one who stands to lose it all?
Unless this person has a strong advocate, NO ONE speaks for them. It is often the nursing staff who speak up at facilities where they house many of these people. And even then, they tend to turn against life as well. (Depends upon how hard the work is with the patient, I hate to say…)

We (society) make ourselves feel better by rationalizing our reasons for allowing infants to die.

We place a higher value on the life of others by deciding that if they aren’t LIKE US, they wouldn’t want to be alive. Who are we to do this?

Tough stuff…but we need a checks and balances system in place to make sure we aren’t condemning innocent people to death just because they are inconvenient to us, to the nurses, to society.

By: Jay

Jay — Wed, 13 Jul 2005 11:20:21 +0000

Personally, I think letting a life die is the same as killing. Now that may be a little on the absolutist side…but I’m speaking generally. There is a saying…”The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who stand aside and do nothing.” There is grey areas however, that I will concede. As for the answer…moral questions such as this shouldn’t be decided by a “higher paygrade”, but by the majority conciouss of society itself.