Should doctors be able to legally kill born-alive infants?

[Maximus Zeebra]

What options in our society prevents people from having sex?

And if people choose to responsibly enjoy sex....we dont care that you disapprove. That's your personal problem and you are welcome to live by it but certainly no one else needs to deprive themselves of such a wonderful thing just because of your opinion.

Well, if they responsibly enjoy sex, they can also responsibly take care of the resulting child.

If they want to decrease the chance, they can use a method to prevent it.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

I have been asking questions of the author who has not answered.

1. What brought about this poll? Is there some frame of reference? Is there some push to kill infants?

2. What do you mean by "legally kill born alive infant"? On other threads some have indicated that comfort care (no heroics) is "killing"

3. How do you see the "killing" occurring? Why do you see this killing occurring?

Good questions. I'd like answers too to help clarify before I tick a box to say yes or no.

 

[Northern Light]

I think Roe v Wade still applies... it's between a doctor and their patient. I don't know enough about abortion or medicine to speak to the ethics of it. What little exposure I've had to the medical world and from talking to people in that world, the general public's understanding of what really happens is rudimentary. Like it's easy for us to judge things in a black and white way, but the realities may not be so cleanly divided. That's why doctors go to school for many years, do basic residency, and then get additional training in specialties before they'd ever do abortions. Roe v Wade makes sense because doctors know more than the public does. The doctor and patient also know more about their particular situation that the public does.

In other words... mind your own business.

 

[perthbum]

When the child is born the mother loses all rights to that child when it comes to its welfare.

 

[Sweden]

Whether the infant is born naturally or from a botched abortion, should doctors be able to legally kill a born-alive infant?

Never
Only in rare circumstances (explain)
Always - any circumstance, if the mother agrees.

In the UK and Sweden (and of course a host of other medically advanced countries) doctors routinely allow severely ill or malformed babies to die by, for example, turning off or not using life support systems. This may meet some people's definition of 'killing' but not mine.

 

[minnie616]

When the child is born the mother loses all rights to that child when it comes to its welfare.

And if the preemie/newborn is born with a life threatening/imcompatable with life condition you still think that preemie who has no chance of living more than a few minutes or hours should be rushed away to a hospital and have tubesand needles stuck into its tiny body instead of given humane palliative care ?

Many mothers/parents/health care givers feel palliative care instead ot extra ordinary care is the more humane treatment in circumstance where the preemie/ infant has a life threatening condition.

When palliative/ comfort care is given; the preemie infant is wrapped in a blanket , kept warm and often held by the motherparent or a care giver, fed and kept conforable and loved until it expires on its own of its medial issues.


From webmd:

When a fetus or newborn is diagnosed with a life-threatening condition, no matter how early or late in the pregnancy, it is a loss that parents grieve.

Parents imagine their child's future from the moment they find out they're expecting. By a first prenatal doctor visit, parents may have countless plans for their baby. Now different plans must be made. For this reason, palliative care may be recommended before, during, and after delivery.

Palliative care is recommended for newborns who:

Are born at extremely low birth weight (i.e. a pound or less)
Are born before 23 weeks of gestation
Are born with a lethal abnormality or malformation
Will experience more burden than benefit from further treatments for their condition

Palliative care can begin as soon as a diagnosis is made, even if it's during pregnancy. If a baby or fetus has a life-threatening condition, doctors usually will offer parents a set of options. Palliative care providers help parents make and cope with these decisions
WEBMD

Neonatal Palliative Care: Focus on Life

 

[Ouroboros]

And if the preemie/newborn is born with a life threatening/imcompatable with life condition you still think that preemie who has no chance of living more than a few minutes or hours should be rushed away to a hospital and have tubesand needles stuck into its tiny body instead of given humane palliative care ?

Many mothers/parents/health care givers feel palliative care instead ot extra ordinary care is the more humane treatment in circumstance where the preemie/ infant has a life threatening condition.

When palliative/ comfort care is given; the preemie infant is wrapped in a blanket , kept warm and often held by the motherparent or a care giver, fed and kept conforable and loved until it expires on its own of its medial issues.


From webmd:



Neonatal Palliative Care: Focus on Life

Well, but if I'm right in my suppositions (see earlier post), what the pro-life faction wanted was a means of levying punitive measures against doctors who were willing to perform entirely legal late-term abortions.

I usually respect conservative Ben Shapiro for his honesty despite his admitted partisan bias. However, when he covered the failure of the Born Alive Bill, he simply accused Lefties of being crazy for killing babies. Since I certainly think he's intelligent enough to be aware of his own party's past history of manipulations, his take on this subject seemed to me incredibly disingenuous.

 

[truthatallcost]

Today, the infanticide apologists tell us not to worry, only 'non-viable' children will be allowed to die after birth. But I bet very few of you know that infanticide has a long and troubled history, having been used centuries ago to limit population growth. American Christian missionaries on missions to China were appalled to witness the wanton disregard for life in 19th century China. Infanticide was a common occurrence in China back then, yet justification was used to rationalize the killing of born children. You may be wondering what justification met the mark for killing babies in China 100 or some odd years ago. Being born a girl was the 'handicap' the Chinese considered detrimental. Reverend David Abeel, observing Chinese customs of the day, estimated that 1/4 to 1/3 of all female babies born in China in the 1840's fell victim to infanticide. How very strange and disheartening it is to read women advocating for infanticide, in light of the fact that merely being born female was once deemed a sufficient handicap which met the moral requirements of day to be legally murdered.

 

[Lursa]

Today, the infanticide apologists tell us not to worry, only 'non-viable' children will be allowed to die after birth. But I bet very few of you know that infanticide has a long and troubled history, having been used centuries ago to limit population growth. American Christian missionaries on missions to China were appalled to witness the wanton disregard for life in 19th century China. Infanticide was a common occurrence in China back then, yet justification was used to rationalize the killing of born children. You may be wondering what justification met the mark for killing babies in China 100 or some odd years ago. Being born a girl was the 'handicap' the Chinese considered detrimental. Reverend David Abeel, observing Chinese customs of the day, estimated that 1/4 to 1/3 of all female babies born in China in the 1840's fell victim to infanticide. How very strange and disheartening it is to read women advocating for infanticide, in light of the fact that merely being born female was once deemed a sufficient handicap which met the moral requirements of day to be legally murdered.

So perhaps you now realize why fighting for women's rights and women's bodily sovereignty and self-determination are the key issue in abortion?

 

[truthatallcost]

So perhaps you now realize why fighting for women's rights and women's bodily sovereignty and self-determination are the key issue in abortion?

I'm not talking about abortion at present, I'm referring to infanticide- the topic of the OP.

 

[grip]

Whether the infant is born naturally or from a botched abortion, should doctors be able to legally kill a born-alive infant?

Never
Only in rare circumstances (explain)
Always - any circumstance, if the mother agrees.

Only if they've aged 20+ yrs and have been accused of a crime. Then we kill them all, even if the mother disagrees.

 

[Lursa]

I'm not talking about abortion at present, I'm referring to infanticide- the topic of the OP.

That's already illegal in the US. As is the right of parents and their Dr to decide to give only palliative care to terminal or severely defective preemies/newborns.

 

[Felis Leo]

Your child is born brain dead. There's nothing modern medicine can do. The law forces you to keep the body alive regardles. Please share your financial plan to make that happen.

That is a hard question, Wayne Jr. My honest answer is that I do not know how I would make that happen through the use of my own financial resources.

 

[jghiretire]

That is a hard question, Wayne Jr. My honest answer is that I do not know how I would make that happen through the use of my own financial resources.

If you decide to keep the child alive - then who pays?? The state??

 

[OldFatGuy]

No. Never. Once a child has been born, at that point the mother's health is no longer at risk and she cannot claim bodily autonomy as a right to terminate the life of her child. No one has a right to commit infanticide, whether they have a medical license or are a mother.

I beg to differ. When an infant is born with severe deficiencies which will only lead to an extremely short life filled with pain, no hope at all for any other kind of life, then infanticide is a mercy. I've witnessed this once during my lifetime, the parents choosing to refuse life support, and the infant passed within hours. Tragic circumstances for the child and the heartbroken parents, only diminished by the later birth of three healthy children, but never forgotten.

 

[OldFatGuy]

This subject is so far off the rails now... thanks Republicans!

Where decisions of life or death are concerned, no situation is beyond discussion, and viewpoints have nothing to do with politics. There are tragic circumstances which few of us are prepared for, and few of us give such situations forethought. There personal decisions to made beyond the pale of mere politics.

 

[jghiretire]

Where decisions of life or death are concerned, no situation is beyond discussion, and viewpoints have nothing to do with politics. There are tragic circumstances which few of us are prepared for, and few of us give such situations forethought. There personal decisions to made beyond the pale of mere politics.

Thank you. Very well said.

 

[OldFatGuy]

Where decisions of life or death are concerned, no situation is beyond discussion, and viewpoints have nothing to do with politics. There are tragic circumstances which few of us are prepared for, and few of us give such situations forethought. There personal decisions to made beyond the pale of mere politics.

The last sentence should read "There are personal decisions to be made beyond the pale of mere politics."

 

[year2late]

I beg to differ. When an infant is born with severe deficiencies which will only lead to an extremely short life filled with pain, no hope at all for any other kind of life, then infanticide is a mercy. I've witnessed this once during my lifetime, the parents choosing to refuse life support, and the infant passed within hours. Tragic circumstances for the child and the heartbroken parents, only diminished by the later birth of three healthy children, but never forgotten.

Just to be clear,, keeping a baby born with severe defeciences comfortable and witholding heroic efforts is not infantacide, Comfort care is a treatment option. The treatment is focused on quality rather than quantity of life. It is accepted in comfort care that some medications (like narcotics) may shorten life in the process of easing pain.

 

[OldFatGuy]

Just to be clear,, keeping a baby born with severe defeciences comfortable and witholding heroic efforts is not infantacide, Comfort care is a treatment option. The treatment is focused on quality rather than quantity of life. It is accepted in comfort care that some medications (like narcotics) may shorten life in the process of easing pain.

I think we are splitting hairs. I understand your point that withholding care is a non violent act, yet it is a taking of a life. This is what bothers the "I am moral than you" crowd. Viewing these instance as if they must be resolved with absolutes. "We can never pull the plug because there is always hope of a miracle when science fails. Life is too precious." For these, relief and dignity are irrelevant. Whether we call it infanticide or comfort care, the result it the same, semantics only a palliative for the survivors.

 

[year2late]

I think we are splitting hairs. I understand your point that withholding care is a non violent act, yet it is a taking of a life. This is what bothers the "I am moral than you" crowd. Viewing these instance as if they must be resolved with absolutes. "We can never pull the plug because there is always hope of a miracle when science fails. Life is too precious." For these, relief and dignity are irrelevant. Whether we call it infanticide or comfort care, the result it the same, semantics only a palliative for the survivors.

I am a critical care nurse of 35 years so it is really not splitting hairs to me.

It is not euthanasia, it is letting a patient (in this case a baby with profound medical issues to be comfortable until the end of it's life.

And comfort care may not (usually?) does not result in a "quick" death. Comfort care can last days and weeks, even months. When we medicate a patient on comfort care, we are focusing on alleviating a specific symptom, not causing death. Sometimes comfort care is just a warm blanket and family holding them.

But yes, I fully get your point about the "hope for a miracle crowd".

It is this discussion that begs the question what did the OP mean in the poll?

Does she think comfort care is legally killing? Does she think no heroics is killing? Or does she mean an active act of killing (scalpel, medications to cause immediate death etc?)

Whether the infant is born naturally or from a botched abortion, should doctors be able to legally kill a born-alive infant?

Never
Only in rare circumstances (explain)
Always - any circumstance, if the mother agrees.

 

[concernedpuma]

Just to be clear,, keeping a baby born with severe defeciences comfortable and witholding heroic efforts is not infantacide, Comfort care is a treatment option. The treatment is focused on quality rather than quantity of life. It is accepted in comfort care that some medications (like narcotics) may shorten life in the process of easing pain.

Just to be clear - it is infanticide. Color it the way that helps you cope, but understand that allowing an infant to die is no different than killing that child in some other way. Do you not see how close to the edge you are treading? Even Hitler had to stop his selective dying programs for the lesser citizens because the German population, who loved him, were so opposed to his mercy killing project.
Maybe even with the best attention they will die early, or they may live to be 100. I don't see that I have the right to allow them to die and I don't think you or anyone else does either.
Regards,
CP

 

[concernedpuma]

I am a critical care nurse of 35 years so it is really not splitting hairs to me.

It is not euthanasia, it is letting a patient (in this case a baby with profound medical issues to be comfortable until the end of it's life.

And comfort care may not (usually?) does not result in a "quick" death. Comfort care can last days and weeks, even months. When we medicate a patient on comfort care, we are focusing on alleviating a specific symptom, not causing death. Sometimes comfort care is just a warm blanket and family holding them.

But yes, I fully get your point about the "hope for a miracle crowd".

It is this discussion that begs the question what did the OP mean in the poll?

Does she think comfort care is legally killing? Does she think no heroics is killing? Or does she mean an active act of killing (scalpel, medications to cause immediate death etc?)

As a Nurse of 35 years, please elevate us. The difference between Euthanasia and allowing a slow death is what? Oh, and from Merriam-Webster =
Definition of euthanasia
: the act or practice of killing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals (such as persons or domestic animals) in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy
Regards,
CP

 

[year2late]

Just to be clear - it is infanticide. Color it the way that helps you cope, but understand that allowing an infant to die is no different than killing that child in some other way. Do you not see how close to the edge you are treading? Even Hitler had to stop his selective dying programs for the lesser citizens because the German population, who loved him, were so opposed to his mercy killing project.
Maybe even with the best attention they will die early, or they may live to be 100. I don't see that I have the right to allow them to die and I don't think you or anyone else does either.
Regards,
CP

So a baby born with overwhelming severe conditions....the doctor indicates there can be no quality or quantity of life...he suggests comfort care. A second opinion of specialist says the same thing.

The family allows for comfort care.

You think that is infantacide? You think they are actively killing their baby?

Why? It sounds amazingly cruel.

It is not necessary for anybody to die with life support, tubes, drains, and multiple painful procedures.

 

[year2late]

As a Nurse of 35 years, please elevate us. The difference between Euthanasia and allowing a slow death is what? Oh, and from Merriam-Webster =
Definition of euthanasia
: the act or practice of killing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals (such as persons or domestic animals) in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy
Regards,
CP

Euthanasia is an act intended to bring about the immediate death of a patient. Think of your pet at the vet. That shot they give is not meant to make the pet comfy....it is meant to end their life as the primary action. You are not dosing the animal for comfort, your are dosing them for immediate death.

Comfort care is simply paying attention to the comfort needs of the patient. A baby born and placed on comfort care may die in minutes or may even be able to go home.

The focus is shifted to comfort.

By the way, comfort care does not mean "no care" it just means a shifted focus.

My mom was in hospice. She had emphysema and had been on O2 for years. She had 2 separate cancers, one the metastasized Despite being on hospice, she was offered radiation therapy for one of her tumors. So radiation may seem aggressive, put it was meant to alleviate some of her more severe symptoms. It was accepted hospice treatment.



Here is a program

Neonatal Palliative Care Service ::
UNM Department of Pediatrics | The University of New Mexico

Hope this helps.It is compassion, not infanticide.