Hypothetical Abortion Situations...

[AliEnvy]

Re: Re: Re: Hypothetical Abortion Situations...

to mourn having actually delivered the baby, going through the process of having a baby, and then grieving, rather than finding out the condition of the baby and rather immediately cutting the whole process short. Does that make any sense?

It makes complete sense and I'm sure it would be a necessary and cathartic journey to closure for many people. When I think about it for me though, I don't think I could even manage my daily life during that journey under that kind of voluntary torture and emotional pain.

Also, I'm really sorry for your cousin. Miscarrying must be hard enough without going through what is essentially an abortion procedure because the baby died in utero and your body isn't responding.

 

[AliEnvy]

My aunt and uncle have a child who is dying slowly from MS. He's eight. He might live to 20. Might. In the meantime, he's full of life. If they'd decided to abort him before he was born, they might have avoided the pain of losing the child later, but really...is that the point of life?

Your cousin and others like him are among the reasons I didn't do genetic screening (the others being highly inaccurate results, late diagnosis and in my case, statistically higher risk of miscarriage than a genetic problem).

There are some pretty incredible, loving and gifted special needs kids out there who may never have been given the chance at life. If they don't know "normal" as part of their experience, who are we to say it's not worth it for them?

 

[TripThruUreWires]

in my heart of hearts, i doubt i could bring myself to abort in any of the above cases. i am personally perturbed that such an option even exists to tempt me.

what i am certain of is that my God is much greater than medical science as well as the world's definition of what is healthy, normal, good and the liberties it affords me.

by the way, while i was pregnant with my first child, i was found to be at an extremely "high risk" for carrying a baby with down's syndrome and subsequently advised to go for an amniocentisis. i didn't. honestly, i was foolish to have the initial test performed in the first place. in the end, my child was born completely "normal".

 

[TripThruUreWires]

Are you saying you know God's will, or what God's will should be?

 

[Laura M]

I would support an abortion decision however I can also see me supporting the decision for birth despite the guaranteed emotional trauma from death.

In every situation there would always be emotional trauma involved if you had an abortion or not.

I don't think I would have an abortion in any of these cases, I don't think I could live with that guilt. I could never know what I would do if I ever did have to make this decision one day. It's a lot easier to make choices in a hypothetical situation.

 

[Liesje]

In every situation there would always be emotional trauma involved if you had an abortion or not.

I don't think I would have an abortion in any of these cases, I don't think I could live with that guilt. I could never know what I would do if I ever did have to make this decision one day. It's a lot easier to make choices in a hypothetical situation.

Agreed. I guess I fail to understand how aborting a baby that might have problems, the extent of which you wouldn't know until birth, is any easier, less painful, or less traumatic than carrying to term and the baby dying after one day or 35 years.

 

[AliEnvy]

by the way, while i was pregnant with my first child, i was found to be at an extremely "high risk" for carrying a baby with down's syndrome and subsequently advised to go for an amniocentisis.

I was 35 with my first and the second most common question I got from friends, family and strangers (after - will you find out the sex?) related to the neccesity of doing an amnio. When I said I didn't plan to do one I'd get these puzzled and confused looks then get asked if I was just afraid of the needle. When I would say the only reason to do an amnio is to make an abortion decision and I had no intention to 'terminate' regardless that shut most people up. Others acted like it was a very irresponsible, risky and stupid move on my part - those people met my hormonally-driven inner princess of darkness lol.

 

[Irvine511]

Are you saying you know God's will, or what God's will should be?

i am saying that i might have to defend my child from suffering through notions of "God's Will" imposed on me by other humans. that's what i was objecting to -- that it's "God's will" for a child to be born to suffer horribly and then die. if that is the case, then i want no part of that God (just as i don't want any part of a God who would send a tsunami to kill 300,000 people because it was his "will").

you can bet that i would have an abortion if i had a child with such a horrible, horrible birth defect that would pretty much guarantee a very short period of suffering while on earth and then a very early death.

and i view a case like this as something rare and exceptional. i do not see it as the same thing as MS.

personally, there's no such thing as God's will.

God doesn't have a will. it simply is.

 

[Irvine511]

IMy aunt and uncle have a child who is dying slowly from MS. He's eight. He might live to 20. Might. In the meantime, he's full of life. If they'd decided to abort him before he was born, they might have avoided the pain of losing the child later, but really...is that the point of life?

and this is where individual situations must be evaluated.

the point i would make is that aborting a Harlequin baby that is going to suffer and die is not about my pain as a parent losing a child.

it's about wanting to spare the child the incredible pain it will endure by simply existing. it's about the prevention of suffering. not my suffering, the child's suffering.

 

[AliEnvy]

From Wikipedia

In San Diego, there is a harlequin sufferer named Ryan González. His treatment involves dosing with isotretinoin (also known as Accutane), the constant use of lotions to keep the skin supple, and use of a very high-calorie diet, including a feeding tube, required by the constant shedding of the skin, believed to shed seven to ten times faster than unaffected skin.

Ryan takes part in the "challenged-athletes triathlon" and swims regularly.

I'm guessing Ryan doesn't feel sorry for himself or expects anyone else to.

I respect people's right to choose in whatever situation they face but I do think we need to be careful when making assumptions about quality of life as a basis for the decision.

 

[Irvine511]

I'm guessing Ryan doesn't feel sorry for himself or expects anyone else to.

but Ryan is an exception, and Ryan was born to a family who can afford to care for him.

why do you think he's mentioned in Wikipedia when the hundreds (or thousands? i know the disease is rare, not sure how rare) who died a few days after birth are not mentioned individually by name.

 

[AliEnvy]

Because there is realistic hope...and that's all some expectant moms and dads need to hear.

 

[Liesje]

but Ryan is an exception, and Ryan was born to a family who can afford to care for him.

There are several in the UK. The government pays for it. They even pay for a laundry service to come to the house twice a day, because their linens have to be washed daily. Besides their appearence and thrice daily cream routine, the girls go to school, go out with friends, have jobs, etc.

I guess I couldn't abort simply because of odds or whatever. A chance to be happy and live a relatively normal life is still a chance....

 

[anitram]

I disagree with a lot of people on this thread but I would fight to the end for their right to choose whichever outcome they deem is best for themselves and their families.

I am not so sure that many people out there would extend the same courtesy to those of us who would terminate in the above suggested cases.

 

[AliEnvy]

I am not so sure that many people out there would extend the same courtesy to those of us who would terminate in the above suggested cases.

That's very true.

I have to wonder also how much courtesy is extended to people these days who have special needs children with conditions (i.e. Downs Syndrome) many people consider easily avoidable.

 

[Irvine511]

There are several in the UK. The government pays for it. They even pay for a laundry service to come to the house twice a day, because their linens have to be washed daily. Besides their appearence and thrice daily cream routine, the girls go to school, go out with friends, have jobs, etc.

i think there are exactly two -- those two girls.

but i could be wrong.

even still ... i am reminded of a course i took on medical ethics once. we saw a video about a man who had been *severely* burned in a freak accident in the 1970s. he was blinded, and spent 3 years getting skin grafts, which back then (and perhaps today, am not an expert on this) were incredibly painful. he said it was like being boiled in oil every day for 3 years, and the video was equally unnerving -- basically him screaming and begging for mercy, asking the doctors to stop and to let him die. the doctors obviously couldn't do that, since he would recover, and he did, though he is now severely disfigured, blind, and with limited mobility.

to this day, he wishes he had been allowed to die than to undergo three years of torture.

i suppose the point i'm trying to make is that it is suffering that i am most concerned with -- i don't think that life is so precious that it must be endured at any cost. i also think that such extreme suffering, as would be the case with most Harlequin babies, is very, very, very rare. this is not being born with Down's. this is not being born with MS. this is something completely different, and it strikes me as unethical for us to fetishize "life" to such an extent that we make others suffer unnecessarily.

 

[Liesje]

i think there are exactly two -- those two girls.

but i could be wrong.

even still ... i am reminded of a course i took on medical ethics once. we saw a video about a man who had been *severely* burned in a freak accident in the 1970s. he was blinded, and spent 3 years getting skin grafts, which back then (and perhaps today, am not an expert on this) were incredibly painful. he said it was like being boiled in oil every day for 3 years, and the video was equally unnerving -- basically him screaming and begging for mercy, asking the doctors to stop and to let him die. the doctors obviously couldn't do that, since he would recover, and he did, though he is now severely disfigured, blind, and with limited mobility.

to this day, he wishes he had been allowed to die than to undergo three years of torture.

i suppose the point i'm trying to make is that it is suffering that i am most concerned with -- i don't think that life is so precious that it must be endured at any cost. i also think that such extreme suffering, as would be the case with most Harlequin babies, is very, very, very rare. this is not being born with Down's. this is not being born with MS. this is something completely different, and it strikes me as unethical for us to fetishize "life" to such an extent that we make others suffer unnecessarily.

Nope, there are at least four because the doc I saw featured only two families with two each. But they have a support group so I think there's more.

Anyway, like you are saying, to be functional with this disease is rare. And even so I think melon just chose it as an example, not as THE disease through which lens to view abortion.

In general, I would not abort because I would not have the amnio tests to being with. However, if others chose to abort, that's their choice and doesn't change my opinion about them as parents or my opinion regarding my own choice.


The thing that now comes up in my mind is, if it's OK to abort to spare the child suffering, what about euthanizing the baby immediately after it's born? I don't know if there have been any real cases, but I recently watched a Law & Order episode where a baby died. The long story short was, the baby was born and the Dr. immediately identified it as having a condition where it would quickly degenerate and become a veggetable. Not only that, but there was a physical component to the disease that would cause the baby to be in severe pain. It was called Taysack or something that sounds like that. Anyway, the mother got a drug from the Dr. and painlessly killed the baby, it basically fell asleep and died peacefully in her arms.

How do you guys respond to this?

 

[AliEnvy]

and it strikes me as unethical for us to fetishize "life" to such an extent that we make others suffer unnecessarily.

I agree with that in principle, but I don't necessarily think (and I may be wrong) that a harlequin baby's suffering is even remotely comparable to the level of pain of a burn victim.

High maintenance yes, excrutiating constant pain that can't be alieviated? I doubt it.

 

[Irvine511]

I agree with that in principle, but I don't necessarily think (and I may be wrong) that a harlequin baby's suffering is even remotely comparable to the level of pain of a burn victim.

i really don't know -- if there are any MD's on the board, perhaps they know.

what about the burn victim? thoughts about euthanizing him at his request?

to be honest, if i were him, i think i'd rather be dead as well. i know there are rare cases of people with severe head-to-toe burns (i caught a few moments of an Oprah show about some beautiful woman who was in a firey accident and was severely disfigured) who have lived and had, i assume, productive lives.

but i don't know that i would want to continue, would that were me. i really don't know.

 

[Liesje]

i really don't know -- if there are any MD's on the board, perhaps they know.

what about the burn victim? thoughts about euthanizing him at his request?

to be honest, if i were him, i think i'd rather be dead as well. i know there are rare cases of people with severe head-to-toe burns (i caught a few moments of an Oprah show about some beautiful woman who was in a firey accident and was severely disfigured) who have lived and had, i assume, productive lives.

but i don't know that i would want to continue, would that were me. i really don't know.

Yes, burn cases are hard for me to even think about. Once I saw a morning talk show and the theme was mothers who had terrible things happen to them and their kids. One of the moms had three kids and this one time, she left them in their minivan to get something from the apartment. Of course, this ONE time, something started on fire and the kids couldn't get out. They were all severely burned, but the youngest two were burnt so bad their entire bodies looked disfigured. It was horrible to see the babies crying in pain all the time and the mother crying because there was nothing she could do...I could harldly watch after a while.

 

[Irvine511]

The thing that now comes up in my mind is, if it's OK to abort to spare the child suffering, what about euthanizing the baby immediately after it's born? I don't know if there have been any real cases, but I recently watched a Law & Order episode where a baby died. The long story short was, the baby was born and the Dr. immediately identified it as having a condition where it would quickly degenerate and become a veggetable. Not only that, but there was a physical component to the disease that would cause the baby to be in severe pain. It was called Taysack or something that sounds like that. Anyway, the mother got a drug from the Dr. and painlessly killed the baby, it basically fell asleep and died peacefully in her arms.

How do you guys respond to this?

yes, i believe it is called Tay-Sachs, and it is a terrible, degenerative, hereditary disease.

i would think that the kindest option would be to terminate the pregnancy or to euthanize the baby.

however, simply because it is the kindest option doesn't mean that it isn't a sticky, difficult situation, especially because with euthanasia, you're necessarily involving a doctor in the taking of human life (and, please, this is such a good discussion, let's not get into "but isn't abortion really euthanasia so how can you be for one and not the other, or why are you concerned with a doctor asked to euthanize a patient but not with an abortion doctor"), and i don't think that's something that sits easily on the chest of a doctor.

what about Lou Gherig's disease? would you choose euthanasia?

all very, very difficult questions, and really the only answer i can give with certainty, beyond wanting to create a situation that involved the least amount of suffering for all involved (especially my theoretical child), is that i am very, very grateful to have been born healthy and that all members of my immediate family have been born healthy.

 

[anitram]

I support the legalization of euthanasia.

But there are issues that have to be addressed like who can make the choice, what their mental state has to be at the time and so on.

 

[AliEnvy]

I support the legalization of euthanasia.

But there are issues that have to be addressed like who can make the choice, what their mental state has to be at the time and so on.

 

[Liesje]

I support the legalization of euthanasia.

But there are issues that have to be addressed like who can make the choice, what their mental state has to be at the time and so on.

Yes, I agree. I'm sure it would create a litigious nightmare.

 

[Angela Harlem]

I agree with euthanasia wholeheartedly. Newborns are one of the groups I am not sure if I agree to it applying to, though. Just not sure.

 

[fly so high!]

I'm 100% Pro-Choice, so i would consider to exercise my right to abort on all of the thread starter's "Hypotheticals".

 

[Kiki]

1. I found this one to be the toughest to think about. I'm a bit ashamed to think I may go through with an abortion, just because I dont agree with them when it comes to me personally. I refuse to judge anyone that's had them or anyone that will. Opinions on the whole are just that, one persons opion and feelings. So no, I don't agree with abortions, but what's been done is done and I'm not going to stop being someones friend or loving a family member if they decided to do that.
All in all.....that's a decision my husband and I would have to make together. If we decided the best thing to do would be to have the baby, then it's just that. I'd have the baby but give it up for adoption to someone that would want a baby and be able to love it unconditionally. That, I don't think I could do. I wouldnt be able to bring the child up as mine and ask my husband to try to care for it. That would be asking way to much of him.


2-4 though---I'd have the baby and take care of it for as long and as best as I could.

 

[blueeyedgirl]

Interesting thread to get bumped