The kid is a vegetable and the doctors were trying to prevent unnecessary suffering. The parents are clinging to nothing.
So have fun trying to score political points over a kid that is already dead, you "scum".
What a hack.
Here are the facts, which people like you and jamesrage seem to want to conveniently overlook while you bash universal health care:
1) The kid is a vegetable.
2) Once life support is removed, the kid will be dead soon after.
3) In order for the kid to die at home, he has to have the breathing tube removed, and then they need to give him a tracheotomy because his upper wind pipe has completely collapsed.
4) Tracheotomies cost money, are painful, messy, and often lead to infection, especially in babies who have no immune system.
To summarize: more suffering, waste of medical resources, and a bunch of political hoopla because the parents just want their kid to die at home. No private U.S. hospital would take him because transferring the baby would cost money, and the baby is going to be dead soon. It doesn't matter how much money the parents have. Medical staff are not going to deal with it.
I find it so incredibly ironic that people who are against UHC because it wastes their money and gives hip replacements to terminal cancer patients will succumb to the emotional hysteria of letting a baby that is already a vegetable die instead of spending more money to please the (understandably) emotional parents.
Total hypocrisy. It's people like you who make the health care debate so impossible to navigate with any shred of sanity left afterwards.
Last edited by Temporal; 03-16-11 at 12:21 AM.
Less painful for him? Or for the Parents? Will surgery actually be MORE painful for him than not having it?and possibly make his death less painful.
That's my issue...it seems the parents are pushing to have painful and wasteful surgery done on their child for nothing but purely selfish reasons of wanting him to die at their home instead. This has nothing to do with the child, who they're pushing to have cut open and made into further discomfort so that he can be taken to a place tha the likely has little recognition of at this stage of development, and everything to do with their own emotions.
Now I respect those emotions and can understand that desire, but the people trying to paint this as doing it for the kid is ridiculous and you can't deny the selfish nature of the action. People are free to act selfish, and sometimes its good to act selfish, but that doesn't change what it is.
I also have no problem if a doctor wishes to do the surgery, nor do I begrudge ones that feels it violates their oath and refuses to do it. Doctors aren't slaves.
The same thing could've happened here. No doctor in this country HAS to perform surgery or accept a patient to my knowledge simply because they demand it. You can't walk into a hospital and demand they cut off your arm and the doctor is obligated to do it.This does point out what would happen if Obama's I don't care health plan were to go into effect here.
"I am appalled that somebody who is the nominee...would take that kind of position"
"A court took away a presidency"
"...the brother of a man running for president was the governor of the state..."
It's horrifying because Trump is blunt instead of making overt implications.
Thank you, Quazi!
Most of you are forgetting/ignoring the most important part of this issue...
It is not MY decision to make.
It is not YOUR decision to make.
It is not the doctors decision to make.
It is not the insurance companys decision to make.
It is not the governments decision to make.
It is THE PARENTS decision to make.
They should let the child go in peace but that should be decided by the parents and not the government.
GARY JOHNSON 2016