• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Family charged 'death tax' for baby who lived one hour

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,937
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Wanna know what would push me over the edge and cause me to hurt somebody? After I got done burying my hour old baby girl, I get hit with a death tax.

If I were these folks, I would tell them to shove their death tax up their ass and wouldn't pay it.

SEATTLE -- Olivia Clark lived for only one hour. Doctors didn't even expect her to survive birth. Now her family has a hard time understanding why the King County Medical Examiner has to review her death and charge $50.

Family charged 'death tax' for baby who lived one hour | KING5.com | Seattle Area Local News
 
From the same article:

King County now requires a review of every death. The medical examiner instituted the $50 fee for cremations three years ago. This year, it included the fee for burials as well.

"The reason we do that is to make sure no one goes to the crematorium or to their grave without society and the family knowing exactly how their loved one died," says Gareth Johnson, King County Prevention Division Manager.

About 13,000 people die in King County every year. Over the last three years, the medical examiner's office discovered the cause of death in 347 cases were wrong and required further investigation, including two homicides. In half of those deaths, treatment was a contributing factor

Now it strikes me as inappropriate that counties should be forcing people to pay for an investigation into the cause of death absent some desire on the part of the family, but that is the reason they seem to be giving.
 
From the same article:



Now it strikes me as inappropriate that counties should be forcing people to pay for an investigation into the cause of death absent some desire on the part of the family, but that is the reason they seem to be giving.

I still wouldn't pay it and would dare somebody to do something about it.
 
I wonder if this "death tax" applies to abortions?

Legally speaking, a fetus was never alive and therefore doesn't have a death to investigate.

Of course, you knew that already. You were just trying to make the point that...

...

hmmm
 
There's a 'death tax'? Seriously?

Aside from the ridiculousness of that, who in thier right mind would callously enforce it on a human being who lived but for only one hour (aside from bureaucrats who think in the same manner as machines)?
 
There's a 'death tax'? Seriously?

Aside from the ridiculousness of that, who in thier right mind would callously enforce it on a human being who lived but for only one hour (aside from bureaucrats who think in the same manner as machines)?

So you're saying that child doesn't deserve to be treated as a person because she wasn't old enough? :mad:

See, lots of ways to spin this.
 
Legally speaking, a fetus was never alive and therefore doesn't have a death to investigate.

Of course, you knew that already. You were just trying to make the point that...

...

hmmm

That's your opinion, not scientific fact.

http://www.prolifephysicians.org/lifebegins.htm
"By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception." Dr. Hymie Gordon, Chairman, Department of Genetics at the Mayo Clinic
"To accept the fact that after fertilization has taken place a new human has come into being is no longer a matter of taste or opinion ... it is plain experimental evidence." The "Father of Modern Genetics" Dr. Jerome Lejeune, Univ. of Descarte, Paris
 
Last edited:
Legally speaking, a fetus was never alive and therefore doesn't have a death to investigate.

Of course, you knew that already. You were just trying to make the point that...

...

hmmm

And a very poignant point it was!
 
Last edited:
So you're saying that child doesn't deserve to be treated as a person because she wasn't old enough? :mad:

See, lots of ways to spin this.

Whatcha think about smacking Christina Green's folks with a death tax?
 
Wanna know what would push me over the edge and cause me to hurt somebody? After I got done burying my hour old baby girl, I get hit with a death tax.

If I were these folks, I would tell them to shove their death tax up their ass and wouldn't pay it.

Given this discussion as already deteriorated beyond the human suffering to the mundane issue of taxes, I will argue as equally dispassionately.

Its not a tax, its a user fee. I thought those that did not like taxes were all for user fees. Without this user fee, the cost is spread amongst all taxpayers.
 
Last edited:
You seem to have missed a couple of important words. Which is weird, seeing as how they were the first two words.



I'm sure it was!
If only I could figure out WHAT it was...

Come now...you REALLY cant figure out why the question was posed in light of the fact that a mother can choose to have a doctor slaughter her unborn child but that same child can be born with little to no expectation of life (due to natural causes) and they deem it necessary to perform an autopsy for a finding of 'fault'? Really? I mean...ideological differences aside...REALLY?
 
Given this discussion as already deteriorated beyond the human suffering to the mundane issue of taxes, I will argue as equally dispassionately.

Its not a tax, its a user fee. I thought those that did not like taxes were all for user fees. Without this user fee, the cost is spread amongst all taxpayers.

The point is more that it is an unnecessary procedure forced on the family that is already grieving the loss of a child.
 
Given this discussion as already deteriorated beyond the human suffering to the mundane issue of taxes, I will argue as equally dispassionately.

Its not a tax, its a user fee. I thought those that did not like taxes were all for user fees. Without this user fee, the cost is spread amongst all taxpayers.

Read Vancemack's post. Maybe you'll get it, too.

Come now...you REALLY cant figure out why the question was posed in light of the fact that a mother can choose to have a doctor slaughter her unborn child but that same child can be born with little to no expectation of life (due to natural causes) and they deem it necessary to perform an autopsy for a finding of 'fault'? Really? I mean...ideological differences aside...REALLY?
 
So you're saying that child doesn't deserve to be treated as a person because she wasn't old enough? :mad:

See, lots of ways to spin this.

Yeah, like an hour's difference between an abortion and a live birth. :rolleyes:
 
Given this discussion as already deteriorated beyond the human suffering to the mundane issue of taxes, I will argue as equally dispassionately.

Its not a tax, its a user fee. I thought those that did not like taxes were all for user fees. Without this user fee, the cost is spread amongst all taxpayers.

And in this case, what would you say exactly was "used?"
 
Legally speaking, a fetus was never alive and therefore doesn't have a death to investigate.

Of course, you knew that already. You were just trying to make the point that...

...

hmmm


Legally vs.'actually is what separates savages from those who value life.
 
Funny how a fee for a required service in a non Red state is a tax, but when it is in a Red state, then it is not..
 
Funny how a fee for a required service in a non Red state is a tax, but when it is in a Red state, then it is not..

and today's winner for "most nonsensical post" is ...... ^^^^^^ anyone have a clue what he is trying to say?
 
I don't agree with the 'death tax' at all - no matter how long one's been alive!
Government shouldn't aim to profit off of death.

But arguing that "since she was only alive for an hour" as a reason not to pay the tax will lead to "the longer you're alive the more death-tax you pay"

Either be all for it - or all against it.
I don't think it would be anymore right if she lived for a week - or ten years. . . it's wrong, period.

Aside that point - I don't think there was a reason to 'find the cause of death' at all in her case - they KNEW she was ill, they knew her symptoms - an autopsy and investigation wasn't necessary.

So, in fact, since they violated the deceased and turned an already difficult time into something far more difficult for the parents I think that they have an adequate claim against the county and suit for pain and suffering.
 
Last edited:
and today's winner for "most nonsensical post" is ...... ^^^^^^ anyone have a clue what he is trying to say?

I think he is saying "look at me! I can be snippy and pithy and post nonsensical bull**** and attach it to conservatives!" In short...EVERY post he has ever posted.
 
Moderator's Warning:
The abortion forum is elsewhere. This thread is not about abortion.
 
Back
Top Bottom