I am having hard time accepting the use of a woman's dead body as a baby

[question everything]

carrier.

Everyone is happy that the baby was born to a brain-dead woman who was kept alive for three months.

And yet, there is something wrong with our society that refuses to accept death as a natural part of life. To be "pro-life" - what a horrible term - is to accept the cycle of life from beginning to an end.

It used to be, in previous generations, that each household consisted of several generations, when infant mortality was common and when life expectancy was short, especially for child bearing women. Birth and death were accepted as natural, as the change of seasons.

But western medicine has made huge advances where children - and adults - do not have to die from infectious diseases; where woman can choose how many children to bear, and to reduce the death risk of pregnancy.

We have improved the quality of life to make many cases of cancer a chronic disease.

But many of us no longer live close to our parents and other relatives. We rush to the hospitals when the phone call comes in the middle of the night, and we demand to do everything to... often prolong their lives for a few years or months.

And it was reported that for many of us, we incur the majority of health care costs during the last six months of our lives but rarely do we, or our relatives, are ready to let go.

Yes, we went through that with Teri Schiavo and too many with a warped sense of what life is are still mad that her husband let her go.

I don't think that the fact that a woman is pregnant should be different.

It is different if a pregnant woman is fatally injured and the embryo is removed from her body and put in an ICU unit. But to keep her alive for months as a baby carrying machine is, in my opinion, an insult to any woman who think of herself as more than a baby making machine.

And, by the way, recent reports find that very tiny premies end up with a lot of medical problems later in life.

The reality is that our bodies are more than a collection of chemical reactions. Just because we develop drugs to treat symptoms, just because we think we can describe a physiological function with an algorithm and replace it with a machine - does not mean that we truly treat the whole person.

[tk2kewl]

1. gotta disagree with you on this one

I agree with most of what you say, but if I were her husband, father, brother, I'd probably want the same outcome.

[JanMichael]

5. Right there with you

It was a personal decision, and the family did not seek media attention--

Live and let live---

Furthermore, if this were Michael and I; I would want him to do the same thing the father in this case did. Given a choice, why should the husband have to lose both his wife and child?

Stephanie

[David Zephyr]

68. I'm with you JanMichael.

It was a personal decision.

[Squatch]

13. Ditto

[Catbird]

22. What was the mother's opinion?

If I were to envision myself in her position, I would leave instructions for biological functions to be continued if feasible if there was a chance for the child to live.

This is a personal opinion. The social choice of whether or not to pay for such costly medical intervention is another issue.

I haven't seen any reports indicating what opinions, if any, she may have expressed on the subject. I may have missed them.

[Pirate Smile]

23. Right, and I think it is what she wanted too.

[sandnsea]

37. and mother or sister

I don't understand the ojection to this. My daughter just gave birth 6 weeks ago. No question she would have wanted to be kept on life support until her child could be delivered. It's the miracle part of the miracle of modern medicine. Nothing demeaning to women about it at all.

[tk2kewl]

39. might as well add in wife too...

for our lesbian friends.

[sandnsea]

46. That would be true

Sorry I missed that.

[Jersey Ginny]

82. I agree, this is a deeply personal decision

I respect the family's decision. I hope that the baby survives. I heard the baby was less than 2 lbs.

[nickinSTL]

2. you think the woman would not have wanted to give her child a chance?

The husband, as I recall, had some serious doubts about keeping her alive as a 'vessel' for the child.

But he believed she would have wanted to give the baby a chance to survive, and didn't want to lose them both.

A horrible place to be in, for him, but I doubt I would have chosen differently.

[Midlodemocrat]

I completely disagree.

This particular case involved a woman fighting cancer who obviously desperately wanted her child to survive. If this was her wish and her spouse's wish, why should I have an issue with it?

I am partly speaking from experience here as well. My SIL died from ovarian cancer which was detected while she was pregnant. She lived 15 months from the time the child was born. That child is the light of my brother's life. She looks exactly like her mother and brings him such joy everyday, I can't imagine depriving him of that. It is what she wanted as well.

[Taxloss]

6. Hear hear.

[tk2kewl]

26. Sad, but touching story.

[Midlodemocrat]

27. It was more of a nightmare, actually.

And we are still living it.

[tk2kewl]

29. I am so sorry for your loss.

I was touched by the description of your brother's feelings for your niece.

[Midlodemocrat]

30. He adores her.

We all do, actually. She is a darling little thing. Now three years old. It breaks my heart when I look at her and see her mom, but her mom went out fighting. Lived for 7 weeks without her feeding tube, eating only bits of yogurt until the cancer spread to her brain and took her life.

[tk2kewl]

34. It is so hard to watch someone dying of cancer.

My mom has been fighting cancer for 15 years and she is really struggling now. :cry:

[Midlodemocrat]

41. I am so sorry.

My dear SIL went pretty quickly, actually. I have had several friends go rather quickly. I don't know which is worse.

:hug:

[tk2kewl]

44. much of my moms time has been really good.

lots of travel with my dad and stuff. it's gotten pretty tough the past year though. mom is one tough cookie -- an inspiration.

[question everything]

28. Please accept my deepest condolences for your and your brother's loss

You say that she lived 15 months after the child was born. Was she concsious to have the joy of seeing that child, or was she unconscious being kept alive all that time?

And, as I am writing this now, I wonder about the chances of cancer cells being transferred through the placenta to the embryo. I don't know.

I do hope that you and your brother will have plenty of years to share the joy of that child.

[ulysses]

33. while I'm not an oncologist

I'd be very surprised to hear that cancer could metatastasize across a placenta and directly affect a fetus.

[Midlodemocrat]

49. I don't think it can.

At least that is my understanding from her doctors at Sloan Kettering. However, the chemo drugs could potentially adversely affect the baby, which is why she chose to hold off.

[ulysses]

51. right - chemo will mess you up

(it's why Ms Uly and I can't have kids). I understand that, at least with some substances like alcohol, the placenta can act as a reservoir and expose the fetus to something for an even longer period of time than the mother.

Sorry to hear about your sister-in-law.

[Midlodemocrat]

36. No, she was conscious. and she enjoyed the baby

for about six months, but the cancer was so aggressive that it killed her 16 months after the baby was born. She was hospitalized for about 10 of those months.

My point being that she didn't start the treatment when she should have/could have to give the baby a chance to live. She essentially sacrificed her own life for her child, much as this woman did.

It has been very, very difficult. I have three of my own and everytime I was pregnant, I would just pray that I would live long enough to raise them. My dear SIL didn't get that chance, but she did, through her unbelievably selfless act, give my brother the greatest gift of his life.

[geek tragedy]

3. I suspect most women would want their child to survive. eom

[leesa]

4. You make a good point. We no longer know how to accept death

Death is as natural as life is and we can't accept it. I think about this all the time as I participate in giving aggressive forms of treatment to people in their 80s for things like lymphoma or leukemia. As our health care system continues to disintegrate, we will withdraw these kinds of opportunities and it should be interesting to see how people cope.

[question everything]

31. Thank you for your point, given from a personal experience

This would be one aspect - that no one talks - of universal health care. It will have some built-in rationing. We have it already in most plans, but with universal plan it would be the lightning rod.

[Fenris]

7. But then, the decision to keep her alive isn't yours is it?

It's hers and her family's. And from what I can thell this was what she and her husband wanted.

[question everything]

38. Agree. Was their decision. I guess I am worried about this being used

as an example in other cases, where the woman's slipping into unconsciousness is sudden and where she has not choice.

Worse, I am concerned about whether the husband is against it but is forced to. Where "social services" intervene, takes the pregnant brain-dead woman under their custody and forces her to "live."

Please don't tell me that such scenarios cannot occur with this administration, this Congress and, these many courts.

[donheld]

74. Your correct in that this should not be forced on anyone

but if they themselves make this choice then it should be supported.

[Warren DeMontague]

78. I would be worried if this was being taken as some kind of banner case

for the "pro-life" jihadis. It's not, as far as I can tell... and I suspect that's because it was a case of self-determination, which is a concept they can't stand.

[dsc]

8. If you are pro choice then you have to support this

She was crystal clear in her desire for this to be done if it came to that. You may not like her choice but if you are pro choice then you have to respect this. Unlike the Shiavo case, there was no dispute here. She had cancer, she repeatedly made decisions which favored the pregnancy over herself, and she told her family that she wanted everything possible to be done to get that baby born. She then had a stroke and the rest is sadly history.

[question everything]

40. Agree. Please see my reply, above (38) n/t

[JDPriestly]

9. I think it should be up to the family in a case like this.

It is really rare to have a brain dead woman carrying a fetus, but I think that if I had been the woman, I would have wanted the baby to live no matter what. It is a personal decision for the family to make. It would probably depend in part on how far along the pregnancy was and, unfortunately, on whether the medical care would totally bankrupt the family.

My question is whether Medicaid would pay to keep a poor woman alive under these conditions just to save the baby. I wonder what all those Christian conservatives would say about paying the enormous costs for saving the baby.

[eallen]

10. Exactly.

[bryant69]

11. Interesting perspective

This reminds me of one of my very first political conversations (on the subject of Abortion, no less). I was talking to someone and suggested that adoption might be a viable option, when he explained that most Adoptions are really terrible for the kids.

I explained that I was in fact adopted. some people would have changed the subject at that point, but he kept at it, saying I was the exception and most adopted children were really miserable, at which point I asked "So miserable that they would rather have never been born? The majority of adopted kids?"

Anyway I guess I'm happy that this kid is going to get a chance to live his or her life.

Oh and please don't infer my present opinion on Abortion from this conversation which was when I was 13? A long time ago anyway.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[LizMoonstar]

12. I agree and disagree.

Agree in principle, but disagree in this specific case, as I believe I recall hearing that she had requested this before she went braindead. (I apologise in advance if I'm misremembering.) If people want to sign themselves up for that, it's none of my business, but I wouldn't want to do it. If it were going to be me and my embryo, I'd say let us go - circle of life and all that.


Then again, I have no children and don't plan on having any for quite some time, so maybe I'd feel differently if that were not the case.

[etherealtruth]

14. I certainly don't view my body as ...

...simply a vessel for children. However, I must say as a mother of three, I would have wanted my body to be kept alive in order to give my baby a chance to survive.

I think this is a deeply personal decision that can ONLY be made by "the next of kin," ... morally (despite having not specifically discussed this situation) if the loved one believes that this is what she would have wanted ... I see nothing wrong with this.

I would strongly be against ANY governmental intrusion into this decision.

[MadHound]

15. This is a matter of choice friend

The choice of those closest to her, and perhaps her own choice if she has a living will. I find it neither wrong nor unnatural to keep this woman along until the baby can be born. In fact most mothers I know would probably make the same choice. There have been cases like this going back literally for thousands of years, where the mother was gravely ill or injured, carrying a child, and kept alive long enough to give birth.

I find nothing wrong in this decision.

[Lex]

16. If it were me, and I were the woman, I'd *definitely* want the baby saved.

And I think my husband would too.

Pro-choice doesn't mean you are a "baby making machine" -- it means you have a CHOICE, and evidently this woman wanted to take this baby to term (since she had not chosen an abortion).

Why is that so hard to understand?

[Strawman]

17. How do you presume to know what this woman would have wanted

In the absence of any evidence of expressed wishes of hers to not be kept alive to deliver the baby, that decision should be left to her husband who should honor what he believes she would have wanted. He claims this is what she would have wanted, and I have no reason not to believe him, just as I had no reason not to believe Michael Schiavo. It's his decision. Not the state's, and not yours or mine. I agree that the idea of a woman's body being used as a baby vessel also makes me a bit uneasy, but, that's only one way of looking at it, and ultimately, it's not any of my goddamn business.

[rman]

18. "dead body" = deceptive framing

[Norquist Nemesis]

19. The reason I don't have a hard time with it on this one

is because I think the decision should be left to the individual and, in this case, the spouse.

From what I understand, he claims this is what she would have wanted. Were I in her shoes, that would have been what I would have wanted as well, but I would put my trust and life in my husband's hands.

That relates to Schiavo because it goes back to keeping the privacy of the decision to the party(s); not the government or some fanatical extremist group presently in control of political policies that limit choices available.

So, while I wholly agree with you that we're not just a big bag of chemical reations, etc., it boils down to making the decisions with the freedom of every option being available from which to select.

[Justitia]

20. It's unpopular here, but I agree with you.

When I first heard this story, I found it ghoulish.
Something unsettling about not letting her go, and keeping her in a sustained state of death.

How do we know what her experiences in "limbo" were like, either physically or spiritually?

And I really ABHOR the concept of "using her body" to incubate.

How will this child feel, once she grows up, to know that she lived on inside the dead body of her mother, who was not allowed to "pass on"?

Not to mention, they were not sure at all what the health of the baby would be like as this woman's body was ravaged with very aggressive cancer - it could have consumed the child as well.

The living, interfering with the passing of the dead (and for so long too - this was not a few days or so), to me, seems entirely selfish and inhumane.

I know most here disagree, but I felt this viscerally.

[question everything]

45. Thank you for your vote of support. I started my post with "I"

in contrast to what management consultants and HR personnel always tell us.

I did not declare that this family should not have proceeded with this route. I expressed it that I, personally, am feeling uncomfortable.

And as I replied to the first few who pointed that this was that family's choice and not anyone else's, I am worries that this could set a precedence in our climate of some people's beliefs taking charge over others' choice.

[Justitia]

47. Of course, all of us here believe it is the family's choice.

You were just airing out your thoughts on something that made you feel uneasy - not as a stmt of dogma, but looking for a friendly place to talk thru them.

I think lots of folks are still a bit skittish over the Schiavo fiasco (rightly so) and are quick to assert the privacy rights of this family.

We should be able to walk thru these topics w/friends, esp here, because we are not of the "black or white" tunnel vision set.

And I certainly understand your fears of how the religiously insane might twist such a case to their own ends - they are definitely capable of it.

If we can't talk about stuff here, with like-minded people, where can we talk about it? God knows - not OUT THERE - with the freaks we currently have stinking up the place!

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

21. I completely disagree.

It's not like the baby was conceived while she was brain dead. That would be what you are describing. She had made the decision to carry the child through to labor, and carrying out her will, her choice is hardly what you are seeing here. Further, unlike Schiavo, they are letting go of her, if she hasn't already passed away.

[Sapphire Blue]

24. It's about choice.. the parent's choice, not yours, mine or anyone else's.

Medical technology was able to extend the mother's life until the child could be safely delivered... the child that both parents wanted... and she was the child's mother, not a vessel.

[mtnester]

25. If we remember the Shaivo case, this is not really your business anyway

is it?

This was a personal, and I imagine heart wrenching decision for this family. Your two cents do not mean dingo shit on it.

Sorry for the brutality of this, but no one, including all of us, have any business putting our two cent spin on this. Let's stay out of the personal decision made in this case, so that when one of US is faced with the same decision, we would be allowed to make it without interference from perfect strangers.

Go ahead.

[question everything]

48. Just hope that if YOU are faced with the same situation

that you have a choice. That this case did not set a precedence so that your desire "do not mean dingo shit on it." That by then a "social service" agency has taken over to assure that "life" continues.

I did not follow the details but some said that it was Susan Torres' choice to continue with the pregnancy at the expense of terminating it and getting treatment for her cancer.

Can you really not see a scenario in the not distance future where a pregnant woman with a cancer NOT given such a choice?

I expressed my personal feelings about this. I did not state that this should not be the case.. that someone should intervene. But, hey, this is the Internet with everyone's shooting first and aiming later so go ahead, vent. Just hope that you, or someone you love, is never in a situation where you have no choice because Susan Torres showed us that a baby can survive inside a body of a brain-dead cancer sick woman.

[mtnester]

57. That was the whole POINT of my post

your personal feelings help inflame decisions like this so that it becomes more likely that perfect strangers intervene.

YOU called her a baby carrier...if that is not to deliberately inflame I don't know what is. I am sure her husband would appreciate your post on your feelings about his decision to make her a baby carrier, and I am sure he would symapthize with YOUR inability to reconcile yourself with his/his family's PERSONAL decision, which STILL is none ya.

I will not ever deny you the right to express your opinion, but I also maintain the right to call you on it.
:)

[question everything]

62. That my personal opinion inflames you is, really, your problem

There are ten of thousands of opinions posted here and there will always be someone who is hurt, or inflamed, or enraged or is dumbfounded.

In many cases, a decent debate can follow, in too many, however, a war of name calling take place with many "deleted message" posts.

I suppose I could have "alerted" the moderator to your choice of language and it probably would have been deleted but I've never believed in running to mommy to protect me. I believe in a debate and in a rational discussion.

Last week someone started a thread asking what brought people to DU. And many replied that this was a nice change of pace to be able to talk to other democrats and liberals, to express opinions without freeper attacking.

Yet, recently there have been many threads wondering about what is happening to DU, that it is "ready to boil over," that there is not enough tolerance, or too much of it.

As someone posted, above, some of us find this ghoulish others find it a story of bravery and yet others don't have any opinion but don't want others - me - to have one, either.

If and when you are ready to debate this issue, or any other, in a calm, rational mode, then perhaps we can continue.

[mtnester]

65. Since you threatened the alert, I will tell you I never once considered

using it on your clearly inflammatory post at any time. Heat, meet kitchen. The fact that you even brought it up the "could have alerted but was better than that" is little different than saying in a crowded room "I could have kicked her ass right there, but I was a better person and did not" says it all.

You heard the same thing from many others here, you just did not like it as plain spoken as I said it apparently. Again, I still have the right to call your opinion (and let me tone it down here a bit so I will not be considered an irrational female) DINGO POO, AND to call you out on what you posted.

Still offended, hit the button. I will proudly call you my first. I did not call YOU Dingo Poo, just your opinion..

And next time you feel the need to "consider alerting me" how about taking it to a PM, then all the public strutting by both of us won't interrupt the flow of the thread. (although I am sure there are many of you naughty folks out there secretly titillated by watching this unfold..for shame)

If you want the last word, you can have it.

[gollygee]

32. Make a living will

My guess is, from what I've read, this is probably what she wanted. Her husband is next-of-kin and got to make the decision as to what should be done. The system worked.

If you wouldn't want this, you need a living will.

[crikkett]

35. I'd want my child to live if I died while pregnant.

Not hard to imagine myself being OK w/ this. It was 3 mos, not 17 years, and the baby lives.

[Desertrose]

42. doesn't really matter what you think...not your choice

and hopefully it will always remain the involved parties choice.

Not the media's...
Not the govt's....

just those involved.

I think it was a brave thing and an incredibly tough call but also what a miraculous gift to have the baby in spite of the tragedy with the mother.
I wish them all well.

[Walt Starr]

43. Why is it any of your business?

Just as was the case with Terri Shiavo, it was her husband's decision to make.

NOT YOURS!

[thinkingwoman]

50. All you need to accept

is that we humans are free to make our own decisions for ourselves and our immediate family members.

It's as simple as that.

Either we are free to make our own decisions, or we are controlled by our government. There is no middle ground.

[Bassic]

52. In this case I have to disagree

The woman was dead, the baby lived. We have the means of helping that baby survive, so why not. Had I been the father that's what I would have done. I do not believe this constitutes an ethical problem. It's the husbands decision.

[damntexdem]

53. Then concentrate on this:

It was her CHOICE, made before she died. Enough said!

[GoldenOldie]

54. Your having a hard time?

Even though this was a decision made by the husband, father, doctors, family, I am sure it was not an easy decision to make, which is as it should be.

I am sure that even while celebrating the birth of his daughter, his heart must be breaking knowing that he must finally let his wife go.

Life is a struggle and some have bigger battles to fight than others. It is not up to outsiders to tell us how these battles should be waged.

[Qanisqineq]

55. I wholeheartedly agree

with everything you said. Especially the part about "an insult to any woman who think of herself as more than a baby making machine."
I see it is not popular to agree but I do.

[question everything]

64. Thank you for your support

It seems that most people cannot separate one's personal feeling from, say, a call to arms.

And I wish that while many here point to the family's ability to choose, that they would be willing to view this with a wide perspective of a potential threat in the future.

At least, it used to be that thinking outside the box, viewing future actions that impact beyond one's own horizon, was what separated liberals from Conservatives.

[seabeyond]

56. i am sorry you see it as wrong. if i were preg, and in this womans

situation,i would so want my husband to want to do exactly what this man did, for this child he and i created, that will carry the memory of me, and will be a creation of our love to remember. and i know my family and my husbands family owuld cherish this baby. i dont see why you are bothered. womans choice. regardless whatever with her body, it is the womans choice, not yours. it would be the best if you didnt even need to feel a judgement of that decision, but even if you do, it doesnt matter, because it is nothing to do with you.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

58. I disagree. Let me preface by saying that I am Rabidly Pro-Choice.

I also want to preface this by saying that it is a little squeamish for me to think of someone being kept alive..a baby hatching factory of sorts, but.....

For years I was infertile, and was very outspoken at the same time about being for a woman's right to choose. I used to have very harsh words with others, even if every menstrual cycle felt like a death to me. Thank goodness, because of a wonderful doctor and surgery I was able to conceive. I now have 2 wonderful sons. If at any point during either one of my pregnancies such a tragedy befell me, I would want to be kept alive so my child could be born. It isn't as if there was a choice, the mother or the child. The mother was beyond hope, so why not give the baby a chance if it's being welcomed into this world with wide, loving arms?

[Karenina]

61. The bottom line I see here

is the issue of PRIVACY. Why should this painful PRIVATE choice be offered up as consumption to the masses? I'm THRILLED that this family has gotten what they want for themselves and I pray for the child's health. I'm only happy that the public airing gave me a chance to send positive energy to this family along with my wish that THEIR PRIVACY be respected.

[question everything]

75. If this is the private matter of the family

how come the media is all over the story? If this was a private issue, then who invited the media to cover the story, to interview the father?

Once this story is all over the media outlets, then this is a fair game for everyone to jump in - myself included.

[question everything]

69. Thank you for a the calm way you present your opinion

I, too, am "rabidly pro-choice" which, on many of those "surveys" put me way way on the left of the scale.

I respect your and others' opinion that come from personal experience.

As I stated, this is my personal feeling and we are here to debate and to disagree.

But, in these times of pharmacists allowed to refuse selling birth control pills, when the MSM highlights death from abortion pill but never mention the death rate from pregnancy (it is higher), when the FDA goes against its own consultants in apporving Plan B pills to be sold over the counter - I shudder to think that this could be a precedence for future cases where a family will not have a choice.

If nothing else, I hope that this debate will make all of us more alert to any hint in such threats.

[LisaL]

70. Yea, I am terrified too.

Soon world will be overrun with brain dead pregnant women forced to carry their babies to turn.
:sarcasm:

[Cleita]

59. This has been done before, or maybe a live baby has

been delivered by Caesarean section when the mother died like in an accident. I really see nothing wrong with preserving the life of the baby if everyone concerned has agreed that is what they wanted. I didn't read the story but maybe the mother may have made her wishes known. Maybe she asked that if she died that they would do what they could to save the baby.

[Kaylee]

60. I don't believe she thought of herself

as a baby making machine. She thought of her self as a mother (or soon to be mother). Being a mom makes you make decisions that may not always be in your best interest, but rather are in what you believe to be the best interests of your child. All she wanted was the survival of her child.

I have no doubt that I would not hesitate one bit to sacrifice my life to save one of my kids. And I have no doubt that had this situation happened to me, I would want to be kept "alive" until my kids had the best chance of survival outside the womb.

This was their choice. Same as it would be if they decided to disconnect the tubes before their baby's birth.

[Karenina]

63. Can this thread simply die a natural death?

Archive it TODAY!!! No more posts speculating on woulda, shoulda... Can we ALL just be happy for a live birth, a WANTED CHILD into a family that prayed for it and LEAVE THEM IN PEACE AND PRIVACY??? I am certain they are grateful to all who have wished them well...

May the baby found next to the dumpster today be united with people who want her as much...

[deadparrot]

66. It was her wish, apparently.

That's at the heart of it.

[LisaL]

67. It is not your decision to make, and neither it should be.

Personally, I agree with the decision a 100 %. This woman wanted to have this baby.

[AngryOldDem]

71. I disagree

She gave the child life.

I can think of no nobler or more honorable act.

You may see her being used as a "machine;" I see her as my ultimate definition of a mother.

[Fescue4u]

72. Why? She's dead. She didnt mind

Why kill the baby to prevent inconviencing a dead women????

[Fescue4u]

73. I bet that Baby will Disagree with you

When he/she gets old enough to offer an opinion.

[Book Lover]

76. I'm a mother, and I'm with you on this one

Though I don't assert (and I know you don't either) that the family's wishes should have been countermanded, the thought of myself being dead but hooked up in order to incubate a fetus sickens me.

on edit: Jesus! The nastiness on this thread is why I don't come into GD often...

[Warren DeMontague]

77. My definition of "pro-choice" means pro-choice EVEN when people decide

to do things with their bodies that other people don't approve of.

It's not for you to accept or not accept, because it wasn't your body, or your call.

[BoardExplode]

79. What a sick view of motherhood you have

This story is about life coming out of death, the triumph of the human spirit. Instead of thinking about that, you immediately label this woman a baby making machine carrying a parasite. Do all births disgust you? You have allowed the right-wing to greatly distort your thinking.

[REP]

80. I Agree - It's Creepy

The pregnancy was in its first trimester when the woman died. The fetus was nowhere near term at the time of her death. The family solicited the public for funds to support this (they have been on TV a number of times to promote their website and to ask for money). The resulting neonate was 800 grams, which is Extremely Low Birth Weight, which puts it at risk for a constellation of serious developmental and physical disabilities - if it survives.

Yes, it was this family's choice to make use of this dead woman's body in this way. By making their story public, they invited public comment. I think it's ghoulish. I do not want laws passed to keep others from doing this, but a serious discussion about it and the implications for the resulting child is not a bad thing. I don't think there's a good understanding of just how risky ELBW pre-term births are for the resulting child, risk that include death within a year of birth; if there were, I think there'd be a lot fewer people thinking they'd wish the same thing for their child.

[sysoprock]

81. I'm gonna have to call bullshit.

"But to keep her alive for months as a baby carrying machine is, in my opinion, an insult to any woman who think of herself as more than a baby making machine."


This guy just went though hell watching his wife stay on life support so that the child they both wanted to create could have a chance, and you see this as an insult to women?

Give me a fucking break.

When she's old enough to read be sure to send the kid an email reminding her that her existence was born out of an insult to all women.