Planetarion Forums
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Planetarion Forums (https://pirate.planetarion.com/index.php)
-   General Discussions (https://pirate.planetarion.com/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   This thread is not about abortion (https://pirate.planetarion.com/showthread.php?t=190203)

JonnyBGood 15 Mar 2006 13:52
This thread is not about abortion
 
Seriously, it isn't. I'm not exactly sure what to think on this one.

Nodrog 15 Mar 2006 14:13
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Parents absolutely must have the sole right to decide what treatment their child receives. It sucks in this particular case since the father is a loony, but you have to consider how potentially horrifying the alternative could be. Imagine a society where a child could be legally required to undertake treatment for a 'mental illness' such as ADHD, OCD, or whatever other undesirable behaviors the state/psychiatric community wishes to eliminate.

I think this sort of thing will become increasingly important over the next 100 years as we start to understand more and more about how to control human behavior, and the best way to prevent the slide down the slipperly slope is to declare right from the start that medical treatment is the exclusive perogative of the parent, even if this means that some babies will suffer unnecessarily.

JC 15 Mar 2006 14:27
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by horn
i'm pretty confused. when did they know this child had the condition and if it was early on why did the parents go through with the birth?

is the baby in pain? will it's cognitive development be impaired by this conditon or will it one day be able to communicate?
We had a seminar on this the other day interestingly enough. The baby has type 1 SMA, it will die before it gets to 2. It cant breath on its own and it cant sit up let alone stand. What's its quality of life? Pretty shit if you ask me.

Presumably they can test for this early on during pregnancy, but i dont know if they can distinguish between type 1, 2 and 3. If you've got type 3 you can stand up and survive into your 20s with a reasonable standard of living. The father doesnt seem like the kind of guy that would agree with abortion anyway.

Dante Hicks 15 Mar 2006 14:41
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
The rights of the child should be upheld/entrusted to the parents in general unless they have disqualified themselves somehow (e.g. negligence, abuse or somesuch). However, I doubt it's easy to have clear cut rules (e.g. what if parents disagree with each other) all the time - clearly there needs to be someone on the side of the child in some cases.

However I see no reason why a doctor or hospital should be obligated to treat someone in every instance. Ignoring the way the NHS is funded for a moment it seems fair enough for a doctor to be able to say (with ample warning / opportunity to swap to someone else if appropriate) "I don't want to treat you anymore as I don't believe it's working". All this "we shouldn't play god" stuff is nonsense - we are all playing God (or should be) every single day - such is the status of free people.

eJohn 15 Mar 2006 14:45
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dante Hicks
The rights of the child should be upheld/entrusted to the parents in general unless they have disqualified themselves somehow (e.g. negligence, abuse or somesuch).
Believing in God, or Allah? They are letting superstition rule their decision, effectively (in my eyes)

Dante Hicks 15 Mar 2006 14:48
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by eJohn
Believing in God, or Allah? They are letting superstition rule their decision, effectively (in my eyes)
In a certain context that might be sufficient, but not here.

Dante Hicks 15 Mar 2006 14:50
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
I usually support the rights of the parents in these sorts of cases but I really don't feel that withdrawing life support from a mentally competent child is an approach which should be open to them.
Going back to the opening post for a second - isn't it the hospital which is trying to withdraw life support, not the parents? Or am I misreading JBG's post here?

JonnyBGood 15 Mar 2006 14:55
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dante Hicks
Going back to the opening post for a second - isn't it the hospital which is trying to withdraw life support, not the parents? Or am I misreading JBG's post here?
You're right. Somehow by reading what the father said it reversed the positions of the hospital and the parents in my head! I'm still not entirely convinced either way :(

Ste 15 Mar 2006 15:09
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
we should let God decide whether the baby should live by leaving it in a forest for a couple of days.

Yahwe 15 Mar 2006 15:20
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Poor Mr Justice Holman :(

Radical Edward 15 Mar 2006 15:21
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
He said: "As a Muslim I believe that no one knows exactly when people will die.
clearly that is not an opinion held by all muslims.

Dante Hicks 15 Mar 2006 15:22
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Oh btw, the court has ruled, the parents won : http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4808442.stm

sigrid 15 Mar 2006 15:25
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
at least he wont grow up to be a suicide bomber.

Radical Edward 15 Mar 2006 15:25
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dante Hicks
All this "we shouldn't play god" stuff is nonsense - we are all playing God (or should be) every single day - such is the status of free people.
precisely. all this God business is a load of crap. God doesn't exist. What is annoying though, is that because it is such a common delusion, that people take it as a valid reason. If he had declared that Elvis Presley had come to him in his dreams and told him to keep the baby alive, or that he had recieved his answer after begging the king of the Potato People for mercy, he would have been stuffed in an asylum by now.

Dante Hicks 15 Mar 2006 15:26
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sigrid
at least he wont grow up to be a suicide bomber.
Don't be a racist idiot please.

Nodrog 15 Mar 2006 15:26
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dante Hicks
Oh btw, the court has ruled, the parents won : http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4808442.stm
Although I agree with the decision, the reason given for it is absolutely terrible.

Quote:
The judge said he felt the child gained enough pleasure from life to outweigh the medical evidence of his condition.
Christ.

hyfe 15 Mar 2006 15:28
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
It's interesting to note how this case was handled as opposed to the Brain-dead American girl some time ago though.

This seemed sane.

Radical Edward 15 Mar 2006 15:31
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nodrog
Although I agree with the decision, the reason given for it is absolutely terrible.



Christ.
it's the sort of weak argument that will have people nodding their heads, but won't make any fundamental pronouncements on the various rights being discussed.

I do have to say I like all the "probablies" though. especially since I am not entirely convinced that such young children are even self conscious to any significant degree.

Radical Edward 15 Mar 2006 15:32
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyfe
It's interesting to note how this case was handled as opposed to the Brain-dead American girl some time ago though.

This seemed sane.
well this is a quite different case I suppose. To be honest, I think that if people had reacted in that way in this case, they would have been more justified, since in Teri Schavell's case, she was brain dead. This baby isn't.

KoeN 15 Mar 2006 15:44
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
things usually go wrong when we 'let God decide'.

JonnyBGood 15 Mar 2006 15:47
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by KoeN
things usually go wrong when we let the dutch out of holland.

KoeN 15 Mar 2006 15:49
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nodrog
Parents absolutely must have the sole right to decide what treatment their child receives.
depends. what if both of the parents are incapable of making choices? mentally disabled people have sex too...

JonnyBGood 15 Mar 2006 15:58
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by KoeN
depends. what if both of the parents are incapable of making choices? mentally disabled people have sex too...
That is the funniest mental image I've had in months :up:

Yahwe 15 Mar 2006 15:58
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nodrog
I think this sort of thing will become increasingly important over the next 100 years as we start to understand more and more about how to control human behavior, and the best way to prevent the slide down the slipperly slope is to declare right from the start that medical treatment is the exclusive perogative of the parent, even if this means that some babies will suffer unnecessarily.
You could use the exact same point to support the counter argument that the doctors should always decide.

Nodrog 15 Mar 2006 16:01
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yahwe
You could use the exact same point to support the counter argument that the doctors should always decide.
No you couldnt.

JonnyBGood 15 Mar 2006 16:06
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
I'm still laughing at koen's post here. Can you imagine the quantities of drool involved?

Yahwe 15 Mar 2006 16:06
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
observe:

"and the best way to prevent the slide down the slipperly slope is to declare right from the start that medical treatment is the exclusive perogative of the doctors, even if this means that some babies will suffer unnecessarily."

Tactitus 15 Mar 2006 16:09
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dante Hicks
The rights of the child should be upheld/entrusted to the parents in general unless they have disqualified themselves somehow (e.g. negligence, abuse or somesuch).
Agree.

Nodrog 15 Mar 2006 16:11
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yahwe
observe:

"and the best way to prevent the slide down the slipperly slope is to declare right from the start that medical treatment is the exclusive perogative of the doctors, even if this means that some babies will suffer unnecessarily."
This would be a poor argument because it would extend to allow psychiatrists to be the people to decide whether a child should to be treated for mental illness, and they are probably the last people on earth who should be trusted with such a decision.

This misses the point anyway. I think its a fair assumption that the community of doctors is likely to be fairly homogenous in opinion at any given time (otherwise 'letting the doctors decide' would be silly, since every doctor would decide something different). And its this tendancy towards normalisation which is precisely the problem.

Yahwe 15 Mar 2006 16:15
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nodrog
This would be a poor argument because it would extend to allow psychiatrists to be the people to decide whether a child should to be treated for mental illness, and they are some of the last people on earth who should be trusted with such a decision.
bitter from personal experience i assume.

You really are bizzare to say such a thing.

"Firemen are the worst people to fight fires! Plumbers are the worst people to ask if you need new pipe work! Proffessional Footballers are the last people on earth that we should include in our world cup squad!"

All of these roles and more are clearly best left to people who's only qualification is the ability to put a penis into a virgina!!

Yahwe 15 Mar 2006 16:19
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nodrog
I think its a fair assumption that the community of doctors is likely to be fairly homogenous in opinion at any given time (otherwise 'letting the doctors decide' would be silly, since every doctor would decide something different). And its this tendancy towards normalisation which is precisely the problem.
I can't for the life of me understand why consistency (what you call normalisation) would be a bad thing.

Your point would leave child A dead of a curable condition because "his parents made that choice", while child B alive and insensate with an incurable condition because "his parents made that choice".

Do you have a problem with consistency because you prefer lotteries? Should we make it more of a game show as well? Perhaps some sparkly costumes?

I refuse to see why parents should be given power of life and death over thier children. When would this power of slavery end?

Kurashima 15 Mar 2006 16:31
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4808442.stm

Hes going to live.

Radical Edward 15 Mar 2006 16:32
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nodrog
This would be a poor argument because it would extend to allow psychiatrists to be the people to decide whether a child should to be treated for mental illness, and they are probably the last people on earth who should be trusted with such a decision.
why is that? I would be pretty clear that they diagnosed it and thus should have a reasonable idea as to what to do about it, if they can do anything, and would know the best course towards stopping the suffring.

Radical Edward 15 Mar 2006 16:33
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurashima
snap

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dante Hicks
Oh btw, the court has ruled, the parents won : http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4808442.stm

Kurashima 15 Mar 2006 16:34
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radical Edward
snap
Ive been following the case on the web, Thus i didnt bother reading the GD debate on the subject.

furball 15 Mar 2006 16:56
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Ok, let's all hold on a second.

Quote:
However, the judgement does not mean that Baby MB would be kept alive indefinitely or that doctors would have to give treatment to the baby in any situation.

The judge has said that, if Baby MB's heart stops, it will be lawful for doctors not to give him drugs or defibrillator treatment to restart it.

They would also be allowed not to give antibiotics if he develops certain serious infections.
Basically he will be allowed to die if he becomes seriously ill, but the doctors have been refused judicial authorisation to withdraw treatment now and in doing so, let him die. It's nothing new, there's plenty of caselaw saying this already.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yahwe
"and the best way to prevent the slide down the slipperly slope is to declare right from the start that medical treatment is the exclusive perogative of the doctors, even if this means that some babies will suffer unnecessarily."
The medical profession carries a great deal of weight with the judges anyway, just look at the sterilization cases such as Re B.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nodrog
Although I agree with the decision, the reason given for it is absolutely terrible.


Quote:
The judge said he felt the child gained enough pleasure from life to outweigh the medical evidence of his condition.
Christ.
No, it's the law. Withdrawal of treatment is based on a quality of life test fudged as the 'best interests' test. Legally it's a mess, but basically you can't let someone die unless their life is practically hell - e.g. if a baby is so brain damaged that it can only feel pain.

In this case, the baby/child appears to respond to external stimulus in a positive manner. Hence, it isn't allowed to die.

Phang 15 Mar 2006 17:33
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yahwe
All of these roles and more are clearly best left to people who's only qualification is the ability to put a penis into a virgina!!
Republican voters?

milo 15 Mar 2006 17:44
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Its a messy one, i agree with nod and dante, id rather the parents decide, doctors can give their advice and opinion but id rather they don't have the final say.

Yahwe 15 Mar 2006 18:10
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
The medical profession carries a great deal of weight with the judges anyway, just look at the sterilization cases such as Re B.
people who don't read the full thread make baby jusus cry. :rolleyes:

Cannon_Fodder 15 Mar 2006 20:21
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Can yahwe actually not type/say vagina?

dda 15 Mar 2006 20:24
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phang
Republican voters?
Not precisely. For a number of years now we have been giving it to the Democrats up the ass.

s|k 15 Mar 2006 20:27
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nodrog
I think this sort of thing will become increasingly important over the next 100 years...
...as Cylons take control and subjects us to the Matrix and we have to fight them until we can't anymore amirite.

Phang 15 Mar 2006 21:29
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dda
Not precisely. For a number of years now we have been giving it to the Democrats up the ass.
it was a pun on Virginia :(

Ephor 15 Mar 2006 21:35
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
1. execute doctors
2. let god decide

sigrid 15 Mar 2006 21:41
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dante Hicks
Don't be a racist idiot please.

dont be ignorant.

G.K Zhukov 15 Mar 2006 22:02
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dda
Not precisely. For a number of years now we have been giving it to the Democrats up the ass.
Officially sponsored by Halliburton!

Vermillion 16 Mar 2006 00:30
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Out of curiosity, if the issue is 'Let God decide', didn't God already decide and people are trying to get around it? The child cannot survive without full life support, including automated breathing and eating through a tube.

Sounds like God decided, and machines intervened.

Phang 16 Mar 2006 00:34
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
verm!!

Vermillion 17 Mar 2006 13:14
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
'Allo, 'Allo, 'Allo...

Just need to drop by every now and then. Keep you on your toes, Make sure this hasn't become Yahwetarion, the game yet...

Kaisto 17 Mar 2006 15:16
Re: This thread is not about abortion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vermillion
Out of curiosity, if the issue is 'Let God decide', didn't God already decide and people are trying to get around it? The child cannot survive without full life support, including automated breathing and eating through a tube.

Sounds like God decided, and machines intervened.

Puny Humans cannot possible interfere in the grand design of an almighty being, thus, the doctors' ability to save the patient (even when using machines) must be what the big Kahuna wants:D


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 16:15.
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2018