Pages:
Author

Topic: Victory for women's rights: Mother wins right to end disabled child's life - page 3. (Read 3944 times)

sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 250
The child did not choose her mother to be her "guardian" but this is something that was done via law. I would agree that adoption is very unlikely but is still something the mother can try if she does not wish to continue to case for her child. I do not see why you say that putting the child in foster care would not be an option. Foster care is always an option if the child does not have any family to care for them.

Agreed the child cannot choose anything and in this case will never be able to choose anything.
Foster parents make an average of $800-1000 dollars a month per child they watch. They often try to watch more then one so they can make more.

This child would require someone who has undergone extensive training on how to take care of her. Care of this child requires multiple and regular administration of tube feedings, care of the feeding tube, multiple daily diaper changes, daily showers and transfers form her bed to a wheelchair. Daily checks for skin breakdown on the buttocks and other pressure areas looking for pressure wounds.

She needs someone who will watch her and be there for her 24 hours a day. No foster parent is going to accept that for $800 a month. No responsible child protective service would put a child with this level of special needs into the foster care system where it is a guarantee she would not get properly cared for. She would need to be placed in a nursing home.

Then the child can be placed in a nursing home (if foster care is not something you would accept). The point is that the mother is not being forced to care for her daughter.

If the child is not able to make an informed decision to have her life ended then there is no reason why it should be, as long as she has not done anything wrong

EDIT: by 'anything wrong' I am anything that would be accepted by society as being deserving of the death penalty
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
The child did not choose her mother to be her "guardian" but this is something that was done via law. I would agree that adoption is very unlikely but is still something the mother can try if she does not wish to continue to case for her child. I do not see why you say that putting the child in foster care would not be an option. Foster care is always an option if the child does not have any family to care for them.

Agreed the child cannot choose anything and in this case will never be able to choose anything.
Foster parents make an average of $800-1000 dollars a month per child they watch. They often try to watch more then one so they can make more.

This child would require someone who has undergone extensive training on how to take care of her. Care of this child requires multiple and regular administration of tube feedings, care of the feeding tube, multiple daily diaper changes, daily showers and transfers form her bed to a wheelchair. Daily checks for skin breakdown on the buttocks and other pressure areas looking for pressure wounds.

She needs someone who will watch her and be there for her 24 hours a day. No foster parent is going to accept that for $800 a month. No responsible child protective service would put a child with this level of special needs into the foster care system where it is a guarantee she would not get properly cared for. She would need to be placed in a nursing home.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 250
The mother is not forced to take care of the child. She could easily give up her child to a foster family or put her up for adoption. While I do think that a person should have the right to be able to die with dignity, I don't think this is a decision that a parent should make for a child if the child has not given consent for the parent to make such a decision

The mother is the child's legal guardian. She is the one entrusted to make decision for the child.

Did you read the article? The child is blind, cannot speak or communicate, and in constant agony. No family is going to adopt this child. No way foster care is an option. A child like this needs round the clock 24 hour care. Essentially the choice is have a full time 24 hour caregiver ie mom stay home and dedicate the rest of her life to watching the child or put the child in a nursing home funded by the taxpayers and have nurses watch her in shifts until the child dies. It is disingenuous to pretend such a child could ever be adopted.

Note this is not a decision about letting a child die. This is a decision about stopping aggressive unnatural medical interventions (in this case forcing food down a tube into the stomach of a child who was and never will be capable of eating) and letting nature take its course.
The child did not choose her mother to be her "guardian" but this is something that was done via law. I would agree that adoption is very unlikely but is still something the mother can try if she does not wish to continue to case for her child. I do not see why you say that putting the child in foster care would not be an option. Foster care is always an option if the child does not have any family to care for them.
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
The mother is not forced to take care of the child. She could easily give up her child to a foster family or put her up for adoption. While I do think that a person should have the right to be able to die with dignity, I don't think this is a decision that a parent should make for a child if the child has not given consent for the parent to make such a decision

The mother is the child's legal guardian. She is the one entrusted to make decision for the child.

Did you read the article? The child is blind, cannot speak or communicate, and in constant agony. No family is going to adopt this child. No way foster care is an option. A child like this needs round the clock 24 hour care. Essentially the choice is have a full time 24 hour caregiver ie mom stay home and dedicate the rest of her life to watching the child or put the child in a nursing home funded by the taxpayers and have nurses watch her in shifts until the child dies. It is disingenuous to pretend such a child could ever be adopted.

Note this is not a decision about letting a child die. This is a decision about stopping aggressive unnatural medical interventions (in this case forcing food down a tube into the stomach of a child who was and never will be capable of eating) and letting nature take its course.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 250
VERY progressive!
I can't believe we have come so far! America, the land of the free!

Come on guys, don't like abortions? Don't get aborted. Don't like slavery? Don't buy a slave.

As a physician who has spent a fair amount of time treating patients in an ICU I have no problem with this one.

Very few people who are not in the medical field realize just how long we can sustain life unnaturally. Cant eat anymore we feed you through a tube. Sick to the point where you intestines cant absorb nutrients no problem we can feed you directly into you veins with TPN (liquid nutrients). Can't breath anymore no problem we will put you on a ventilator. Heart is shot we can put a mechanical LVAD (heart assist device in).

We can and will keep you going on and on while you family watches you gradually and progressively deteriorate. Eventually something will fail that we can't stop. We can not replace liver function yet. Also chronic infection may set in something that wont respond to antibiotics.

This poor mom has taken care of an extremely sick child for 12 years. A child that had no hope of ever growing into an healthy adult. A child that in any other time would have died naturally as an infant. Don't judge her unless you truly understand what she has been through.

The mother is not forced to take care of the child. She could easily give up her child to a foster family or put her up for adoption. While I do think that a person should have the right to be able to die with dignity, I don't think this is a decision that a parent should make for a child if the child has not given consent for the parent to make such a decision
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
May the child's soul rest in peace.
It just makes me sad that she havent even enjoyed what life has to offer, but Im glad that her and her mom's suffering already came to an end. Will pray for them both.
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 504
however, the attitude of a mother ending the life of her child by abortion, is a mistake that must be corrected, ending the life of someone else in the religious law and state law are not allowed, there are conditions where it is allowed, if the child is a life-threatening mother conceived him, hopefully can be given the best ... Roll Eyes

Don't make me abort you
sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 250
however, the attitude of a mother ending the life of her child by abortion, is a mistake that must be corrected, ending the life of someone else in the religious law and state law are not allowed, there are conditions where it is allowed, if the child is a life-threatening mother conceived him, hopefully can be given the best ... Roll Eyes
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
You're assuming the doctors weren't honest

Not at all. I am sure her doctors were good people who worked hard to save the life of a very sick child.
I am not at all certain, however, that the mother had any idea what she was getting into when she consented to various invasive procedures to "save" her child's life when she was an infant.  

The problem is a cultural one. We as a society are unwilling to ever let nature take its course.
Medicine does not focus on the long term but rather the immediate problem.

Combine that with a false belief among the masses that doctors can cure anything and a false hope that maybe they will someday invent something that can reverse severe brain damage and you have a setup for tragedy.



legendary
Activity: 2044
Merit: 1115
★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!
It's so good that she waited twelve years to decide.

A victim of the medical system? If her doctors had been honest with her at the beginning, if she was educated and informed what her child's life was going to be like and that there was zero chance for a normal life do you think she would have made the same choices?

Maybe she would, but I can tell you that at least in the US these discussion are often never had with parents. Instead parents are told that their child is very sick and needs this life saving "insert operation here" or they will die immediately.


I think a little of this is that we hold that life-saving measures prolong life in hopes that treatments can be developed, even if they're not immediately available. However, there are some medical situations where this is never a viable option, but the alternative (death) is always permanent and irreversible.
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 504
It's so good that she waited twelve years to decide.

A victim of the medical system? If her doctors had been honest with her at the beginning, if she was educated and informed what her child's life was going to be like and that there was zero chance for a normal life do you think she would have made the same choices?

Maybe she would, but I can tell you that at least in the US these discussion are often never had with parents. Instead parents are told that their child is very sick and needs this life saving "insert operation here" or they will die immediately.





You're assuming the doctors weren't honest
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 504
It's so good that she waited twelve years to decide.
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
VERY progressive!
I can't believe we have come so far! America, the land of the free!

Come on guys, don't like abortions? Don't get aborted. Don't like slavery? Don't buy a slave.

I have no problem with this one very few people realize just how long we can sustain life unnaturally. Cant eat anymore we feed you through a tube. Sick to the point where you intestines cant absorb nutrients no problem we can feed you directly into you veins with TPN (liquid nutrients). Can't breath anymore no problem we will put you on a ventilator. Heart is shot we can put a mechanical LVAD (heart assist device in).

We can and will keep you going on and on while you family watches you gradually and progressively deteriorate. Eventually something will fail that we can't stop. We can not replace liver function yet. Also chronic infection may set in something that wont respond to antibiotics.

This poor mom has taken care of an extremely sick child for 12 years. A child that had no hope of ever growing into an healthy adult. A child that in any other time would have died naturally as an infant. Don't judge her unless you truly understand what she has been through.
legendary
Activity: 2044
Merit: 1115
★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!
I can't believe we have come so far! America, the land of the free!

You know this wasn't in America, right?
hero member
Activity: 647
Merit: 501
GainerCoin.com 🔥 Masternode coin 🔥
Quote
Nancy Fitzmaurice was born blind and suffering from hydrocphalus, meningitis and septicaemia, which left her unable to talk, walk, eat or drink.

I don't think the child could decide anything.

And I don't see how this is a victory for women's rights, it's a victory for human rights in general.
How is this a victory for human rights? We are taking about a parent of a child deciding to end the life of a child whose life is already established.

At this point in the child's life there is no risk to the parent if the child's life is not ended. The child should be able to make this kind of decision on their own if it is found by the court they will never be able to life any kind of "happy" life that is without pain.
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 504
Whaaat? Is she serious? How did she do it?

I'll tell you how she didn't do it

She didn't do it Old Testament style by ripping her up with a sword
member
Activity: 67
Merit: 10
Whaaat? Is she serious? How did she do it?
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 504
Quote
Nancy Fitzmaurice was born blind and suffering from hydrocphalus, meningitis and septicaemia, which left her unable to talk, walk, eat or drink.

I don't think the child could decide anything.

And I don't see how this is a victory for women's rights, it's a victory for human rights in general.
The child must have been unable to decide anything. She was blind and unable to talk, walk, eat or drink - how would she be able to decide?  Huh 


Checkmate pro-choicers
sr. member
Activity: 518
Merit: 250
Quote
Nancy Fitzmaurice was born blind and suffering from hydrocphalus, meningitis and septicaemia, which left her unable to talk, walk, eat or drink.

I don't think the child could decide anything.

And I don't see how this is a victory for women's rights, it's a victory for human rights in general.
The child must have been unable to decide anything. She was blind and unable to talk, walk, eat or drink - how would she be able to decide?  Huh 
legendary
Activity: 2786
Merit: 1031
Quote
Nancy Fitzmaurice was born blind and suffering from hydrocphalus, meningitis and septicaemia, which left her unable to talk, walk, eat or drink.

I don't think the child could decide anything.

And I don't see how this is a victory for women's rights, it's a victory for human rights in general.
Pages:
Jump to: