Killing babies no different from abortion, experts say

[dixiegrrrrl]

Parents should be allowed to have their newborn babies killed because they are “morally irrelevant” and ending their lives is no different to abortion, a group of medical ethicists linked to Oxford University has argued.
The article, published in the Journal of Medical Ethics, says newborn babies are not “actual persons” and do not have a “moral right to life”.
The academics also argue that parents should be able to have their baby killed if it turns out to be disabled when it is born.

The journal’s editor, Prof Julian Savulescu, director of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, said the article's authors had received death threats since publishing the article. He said those who made abusive and threatening posts about the study were “fanatics opposed to the very values of a liberal society”.

Link to rest of story and to Journal article itself:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9113394/Killing-babies-no-different-from-abortion-experts-say.html

This feels like a false flag story, to me.Note the use of "liberal society" being painted as supporting infanticide.

[Just Saying]

1. The link to the article the story is based on is a dead.

I'm not buying it.

[KamaAina]

6. Try this

http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/03/01/medethics-2011-100411.short



Note that one of the coauthors is Australian. I wonder if she's a disciple of Peter Singer, who has been spewing this noxious crap for years.

[Just Saying]

10. Thank you

Wow pretty disgusting stuff.

[HockeyMom]

2. Futile care

Should these newborns with severe disabilities be kept alive no matter the cost when there is no hope? Pro-life people think so. Who pays for this? I used to work for a non-profit whose insurance coverage was dropped because a "hopeless" infant racked up 3 million dollars in care (died after one year). Should the rest of the employees, and their children, have to go without coverage for ONE doomed infant? They don't want to think about this.

[KamaAina]

7. The futile care law in Texas was signed by none other than

Gee Dubya Boosh*.

[Boom Sound 416]

20. Yeesh. That is a tough one

We have a home near us for adults and older kids mostly with Down syndrome. Seems to be a private institution but it very well could be publicly subsidized.

Doesn't the ACA factor in as Pre-existing in these cases now?

Still what are you supposed to when the baby is born? I met a lot of parents dealing with these issues recently when my younger was sick. It's a hard life. Probably a kind of nightmare, but they didn't really act that way. I guess you only can find that kind of strength when you're faced with it.

[NightWatcher]

3. Likening women who have a medical procedure to a killer? Nice rw BS

If that's the case they'd legalize all murder and just call it Very Late Abortion. Kill a 33 year old during their 99th trimester?

[blm]

4. The story then goes on to say that George Zimmerman showed up to rescue the babies, right?

.

[Rex]

9. LOL!

[backscatter712]

5. I call bullshit. n/t

[LuvNewcastle]

8. I wish people wouldn't say stupid shit like this.

It gives ammo to anti-choice radicals.

[GlashFordan]

16. Yes, they commonly make the argument

That if you allow an elective 3rd trimester abortion then there is no substantive difference from murdering a newborn infant.

[PoliticAverse]

11. This article in the Telegraph is from Feb of 2012.

It was previously discussed on DU back then: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002373365

The original article in the Journal of Medical Ethics was published February 23, 2012.

You can read it here:
http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/03/01/medethics-2011-100411.full

[dixiegrrrrl]

13. Appreciate that info..

Wasn't aware of that.

[longship]

15. Here's a great DUer!

At the fingertips is able to call back the documentation.

R&K for this response alone.

[Puzzledtraveller]

12. the link works, regardless the veracity

thats fucked up

[SheilaT]

14. Read the book

Unwind by Neal Shusterman. It's a YA, but don't let that put you off. Sometime in the future an actual war between pro-life and pro-choice armies is settled by passing a "Bill of Life". It says "human life may not be touched from the moment of conception until the child reaches the age of thirteen. However, between the ages of thirteen ad eighteen, a parent may choose to retroactively "abort" a child." The process in which a child is retroactively aborted is called "unwinding".

A spooky and fascinating read.

[dixiegrrrrl]

18. Obviously written by a parent of a teenager......lol.

I used to mutter darkly about wanting a retroactive birth control formula when my kids hit the terrible teens.....

[BainsBane]

17. What crap

First off, the telegraph is a RW rag. I don't believe a world of this.

[Downwinder]

19. Sounds like "Pre-persons" by Phillip K. Dick