Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think it's wrong for a dead woman to be used as an incubator?

365 replies

twofingerstoGideon · 18/12/2014 07:11

One of the most dreadful stories I've read in a long time. Could be triggering.

'Clinically dead' (that's dead, isn't it?) woman kept on life support machine to support 17 week fetus. Her own parents want the life support switched off. I really can't get my head around this at all.

AIBU to think we need to do everything possible to prevent our abortion laws becoming more restrictive and fight against the anti-choice demonstrators who are becoming more and more vociferous and ever-present outside clinics.

Surely even the most staunch anti-choicer can't argue that this is right.

story here

OP posts:
plinkyplonks · 19/12/2014 10:55

What happens if that's what she wanted though? Regardless of how bad she looks and how her family feel about it... The trouble is that if this is what she would have wanted but her family disagree - are their wishes more important? We have no idea either way - I'd imagine her boyfriend/husband would have the best idea but no one knows for sure.

In the absence of a definitive statement from her either way - all we have is what her family say and what her boyfriend wants. Who gets to win in that situation or should it be up to the doctor's to make a decision based on the baby's chances of survival? Mind you, there are baby's born very early and with poor prognosis yet they survive so where do you draw that line?

So do we go down the route that we have in the UK - where the presumption is that life is to be preserved unless explicitly said otherwise .. or do we go down the organ donation route where you need to opt in?

And if they do switch off the life support machine and she had wanted the baby to have the opportunity to survive, aren't they going against her wishes switching the life support off?

This is a no win situation.

The way forward I think is an opt in/out out situation as part of antenatal care where you expressly state your wishes.

Dipankrispaneven · 19/12/2014 11:00

As a Mother, I know with absolute certainty that with each of my pregnancies, if I had died and my baby had a chance to live, I would have made this choice for myself.

The problem is, MammaTJ, you are saying this with all the hindsight of knowing your children as they are now. Sure, if I think of my children, I can't contemplate wanting any of them to die. But that isn't the situation here. Would you still be absolutely certain if you knew that the reality would be that that your child was probably severely brain damaged by whatever caused you to be clinically dead; would be further damaged by the drugs being pumped into you to keep you going; might have to have a premature emergency birth if you develop something like pneumonia; and stood a high chance of not surviving anyway?

Dipankrispaneven · 19/12/2014 11:03

In the absence of a definitive statement from her either way - all we have is what her family say and what her boyfriend wants

Do we know what her boyfriend wants? I haven't seen any mention of this. However, it is reasonable to assume that her family are much better placed to say what she would have wanted than her doctors and a load of strangers on the internet.

plinkyplonks · 19/12/2014 11:16

Dipankrispaneven This is a discussion where no-one can win or have the right answer because the mother never (as far as we are aware) has expressly stated what she wanted. I think it was mentioned earlier on in the thread about the boyfriend - we have no idea what he wants but judging by some of the comments here his opinion shouldn't matter - even if he was in a situation where he was in a better position to judge her wishes.

So you can make cheap shots and snide comments about people trying to have a discussion about this or help contribution to the wider points at hand i.e. how to prevent situations occurring like this again?

Gileswithachainsaw · 19/12/2014 11:17

People are yet to answer the question of what happens to the baby.

The family can't take it or are too traumatised. adoptive parents lined up can't cope with the level of care the baby needs after the drs decide the body is far to gone and the drugs are no longer working and not only is the baby severely premature theres brain damage from the event that killed the mother.

People are all set to congratulate themselves on a job well done because the babies "alive"

but what then

Sallystyle · 19/12/2014 11:24

Why would you not want to give your child a chance at life?

Because I simply care more about my already born children.

I watched my kids watch their dad die and it was horrendous. I would never, ever want my children to have to know I am lying on a bed, dead in every way that matters but not being able to communicate with them, deteriorating in front of their eyes, knowing that once I have served my purpose I will be allowed to die. I would have to be pumped full of drugs and all sorts to keep this child growing and my kids would not be able to grieve for me, they would be left in limbo and I know what it is like for kids to have to wait for a parent to die, it is fucking cruel. Those weeks of waiting for a parent to die are evil for many adults, let alone young children.

I would want my family to be able to start grieving for me.

My children's emotional welfare is simply more important to me than a foetus that has a very slim chance of surviving.

Yeah, it sounds pretty romantic doesn't it? having a machine keep you alive so your baby can live.. reality is, the other people like your children are going to go through hell and back and I would not want to save a foetus at the expense of them.

Gileswithachainsaw · 19/12/2014 11:25

And just how, do you think the whole thing will affect your children for the rest of their lives? Look right now at their happy innocent little faces and tell me just what do u think will happen to them.

and how will you shelter the baby from.people telling them. The circumstances surrounding their existence. Just what do you tell them.

oh I forget your dead it doesn't matter

Sallystyle · 19/12/2014 11:26

Exactly Giles

Like a lot of pro-life people, they care that the baby is born, but never actually think about what happens after it is born.

plinkyplonks · 19/12/2014 11:29

Understandably you would choose a different option to me should anything bad happen and that's OK :) - do you think it should be an opt in/opt out situation?

Sallystyle · 19/12/2014 11:32

Anyone who has had a parent die at a young age or supported a child through the death of a parent will tell you how cruel it is, what it does to them. My children are broken right now, their whole lives have changed and they are vulnerable and hurting.

That was a death due to cancer, not one where they had to know their mother was being kept alive for a foetus that is unlikely to survive or be born healthy. They were able to grieve for him.

I can't even begin to imagine how much worse this situation would be for a child and it hurts me to even try to think about it.

I think it is the height of selfishness to keep this woman going with no thought to her existing children, you know, the ones who are already born. They should matter more.

Gileswithachainsaw · 19/12/2014 11:36

I don't know what the answer is. But it isnt letting women rot for 6 months regardless of the baby's health or level of deformity. and torturing the poor family.

CelesteToTheDance · 19/12/2014 11:59

This should only be allowed if a woman signs a consent form stating they want to be kept artificially alive to incubate their foetus to term if this were to happen. They should set up a register for all those who wish to be corpse incubators so there's no risk to the rest of us if we ever found ourselves in such a hideous situation.

I knew this was Ireland before I even clicked the link. I long for the day when our doctors are allowed to practice medicine rather than Roman Catholic doctrine. It's bad enough women can't get necessary medical treatment when pregnant but now we have to forfeit a proper passing and be forced into artificial life for months on end to sustain a not yet viable potential life.

It's disgusting, evil and ghoulish. That's what religion produces.

Lweji · 19/12/2014 12:20

Because you wouldn't want your family to witness your skin cracking on your lifeless limbs? Because you wouldn't want your two existing children to ask why mummy smells funny?

That would hardly be the situation, as she the body is being kept alive.

I do agree with plinkyplonks
This is a discussion where no-one can win or have the right answer

Andcake · 19/12/2014 12:22

I think a consent form would be right. But we need to remember that a child has two parents. Once your dead your body is just a piece of flesh like you would find in a butchers as long as no child was exposed to it being kept alive fine. I know 2 children whose mothers died at or within a year of birth and both have great extended families and fathers caring for them.
For an existing child the mother they would be grieving whichever way. I have a friend whose mother lost a baby when she got cancer many moons ago he also lost his mother. He clearly remembers his mother being pregnant and talks about the loss of a sibling as well his mum even now 40 years on. With his dad now gone maybe he would have liked another family member.
But it's an individual choice obviously. If I had died it would be great to still give life to a wanted child and give dc and dp that gift.

KateMosley · 19/12/2014 12:33

I don't the think it matter at all what her parents want.

It should be totally up to the baby's Father.

My parents have fuck all idea what I would want in pretty much any situation. The parents of an adult should have no say over the husband/partner someone chose for themselves.

I would want my baby to have a chance and my husband would know that. My parents would probably think it was 'kinder' to just let me go.

CelesteToTheDance · 19/12/2014 13:18

Nobody should be allowed to dictate that another person be deprived a rightful death and burial so they can be kept artificially alive to incubate a foetus, for medical experimentation or for any other reason. Only an individual should be allowed to choose that hell for themselves, anyone who wants to sign up for it should be encouraged to do so, nobody should ever have it inflicted on them because of somebody else's selfish wants or religious insanity.

Lweji · 19/12/2014 14:28

Only an individual should be allowed to choose that hell for themselves

Surely it's not hell for you if you are brain dead?
Maybe for your family, but not you.

littlemslazybones · 19/12/2014 14:48

I keep trying to write post but then keep deleting it. I can't get past the 'yuk' factor to think clearly about the ethics involved. I am certain that I would not want to be brought into the world through a corpse.

Lweji · 19/12/2014 14:52

Is a brain dead body that otherwise is alive even if by artificial means a corpse?
Fascinating subject.

ArcheryAnnie · 19/12/2014 14:52

Her own parents want the life support switched off. If the baby survives (a big if), they will grow up knowing they were gestated in their mother's corpse. I can think of few things worse.

The woman is being used as a thing. People who cannot express an opinion one way or another should never be used as things.

Lweji · 19/12/2014 14:55

But then the living foetus is also being considered a thing that can be allowed to die inside his mother.
I think that would be gruesome, TBH. Worse than the alternative.

People who cannot express an opinion one way or another should never be used as things.
The mother is no longer a person, there's only her body, while her child has a chance for a life instead of a slow death inside what is still a living body. And the foetus can't express an opinion either.

ArcheryAnnie · 19/12/2014 14:59

The living foetus is a thing, Lwej. It isn't a person yet. It has the potential (a very slight potential, now) to be a person.

If that foetus does develop into a person, and retains enough cognitive ability to understand, I would not want to be the medical professional or family measure that explained the circumstances of its' gestation to it.

Lweji · 19/12/2014 15:03

But the dead mother doesn't even have the potential. It's like choosing between burial or cremation. It does not matter for the deceased.

As for the birth of the child, many children are born of extraordinary circumstances (some better, and some worse). For me it would be important that that child does get that chance.

Sn00p4d · 19/12/2014 15:04

Surely it's more the husband/fathers choice in this situation than the parents. Who knows what sort of relationship the lady had with her parents anyway. It's his baby, his choice.
I'm pregnant at the moment, if anything happens to me I would without a shadow of a doubt be happy to be kept alive artificially to give my baby any chance of life.

Lweji · 19/12/2014 15:07

My baby at 12 weeks gestation, was jumping around and moving his arms. I saw it on the scan screen.
At 17 weeks it's even more advanced. It wouldn't be able to survive outside the body, but I wouldn't want to kill it, although I do understand it is a very uneasy situation.
Do we really want to compare the rights of a dead person, who really no longer is, to the rights of a living being that very much is and has the potential to be a full person?