Doctors: let us kill disabled babies

[ALoudFireworkScaredMyBadMouse]

Joy Delhanty, professor of human genetics at University College London, said: ?I would support these views. I think it is morally wrong to strive to keep alive babies that are then going to suffer many months or years of very ill health.?

What do you think?

I think that people whith handicaps need to be valued more in society. I think all to often people talk about them being burdens instead of talking about the things that they contribute. Many people with handicaps have jobs and sometimes even familys. I think because these people are viewed as "diffrent" they make people uncomftorable and just would rather not deal with them. I suppose putting them to death immediatly seems approprate to some but it discust me. We all have our handicaps after all.

They read a letter out on TV this morning- parents would be much happier if disabled children were disposed of and their burdens lifted.

How dare these people assume they know what would make other people happy, least of all in this situation.

I'm not anti the Honey stiryline on Eastenders, as I know of two famillies where the birth of a child with Downs Syndrome resulted in exactly the same- Mothers leaving the child with the father and vanishing. I do notice that it all seems to have cropped up at the same time, though.

feel very sickened.

and angry.

and sad.

who on earth wrote that letter Peachy?

So is anyone going to write to the RCOG or the Sunday Times? I'm going to try and find the time this week.

Totally agree with JimJams, am appalled that doctors are talking like this, it is not their decision to make and not their job to take life.

Also agree with geekgirl - more support for disabled people instead of suggestions like this.

This sent a shiver down me yesterday

They spent 20 mins bringing my daughter back. She also arrested (in the MRI) at 4 days old. After that episode we are asked if we'd like to add a DNR. At the time we just wanted our baby to live and didn't really think of the consequences and so said no.

At 5 days old we were told she would be severely disabled. At 7 days old we were told she would never walk or talk, will have epilepsy, will have severe learning difficulties, not eat orally, quite likely be blind, possibly be in pain and her outlook was very grim. She was very unresponsive and we were told that was how she would be always.

Once she was weaned off the epilespy meds, she 'woke' up and took an interest in the world. She is classed as having mild CP. She walks, talks, is at the bottom end of normal intelligence, eats a normal diet, no epilepsy, perfect vision.

I've been wondering all night, she'd probably be one of the candiates for euthanasia if it had been around at the time of her birth and that scares me! Doctors can still get it so very wrong

I doubt doctors went in to the profession to take life.

But every day they have to make decisions about how much resource to give to prolong life.

I have been there with both my parents, and my perspective is that there is much more resource directed towards those at the 'beginning' of their life than those deemed to be at the end.

bigbird I'm happy they were wrong about your daughter. It must have been heart wrenching to go through.

The medical profession does (imo) often have a very odd attitude towards disability (perhaps because they can't fix it- don't know). That's frightening bigbird- when you read something like this- I have found that doctors like to give the big sweeping "will never do X", and I don't suppose they're around to find out how horribly wrong they got it (it's been said to so many friends of mine).

paula that's true- although also worth adding that even those who can never work etc can bring a huge amount into other people's lives.

Jimjams, it was one of those viewers letters on Breakfast TV.

There's lots of people saying in discussions that they want to die because they have a low quakity iof life and so therefore all disabled kids dhould have that right- but surely there's disparity betweeen a severe drop in life standards (which I sympathise with ) and someone who is born into that and doesn't know different? Surely psychology is at least some of the issue with ths argument?

gosh yes I agree completely. A huge difference.

But I think you also have to take into account the immense pain some of these babies are in and will continue to be in.

is this about 'killing' babies or about not going to massive and extraordinary lengths to keep them alive?

there is a difference imo. and parents should have the say so on it.

Message withdrawn

Sorry JimJams, did not mean to imply that those who did not work or have familys are worthless. Of course they are very valuable.

I think bigbird?s experience is very real proof that doctors do not always know what they?re dealing with. I do think though that there is a very big difference between deciding not to go to extraordinary lengths to prolong a life and deciding to end a life because it is deemed to be not worthwhile. And I think that every life should be treated the same, whether it is a baby/child/adult. Why should it be deemed unacceptable to euthenase a two year old but yet it would be deemed acceptable to do the same to a newborn? When did the lives of newborn babies become less significant than those of the rest of the population?

I also think it?s easy for someone who has never had experience of looking after a disabled child, that is their own disabled child, to say that having such a child could be viewed as a burden. How can someone possibly know how they are going to think of their child in 3,10, 20 years time if they have no experience of caring for a seriously disabled child and all they have to go on is what the doctors are telling them? With time comes experience, and with experience comes understanding. Imagine making a decision to end a baby?s life based on what doctors have told you, and then meeting an older person with the same condition years down the line, and realizing that actually it wouldn?t have been that bad? I just can?t see how anything positive can come from this suggestion.

Good post.

I also hate the emphasis on relieving the burden on the parents.

yes some children are in severe pain, it may be right that inappropriate life saving activities may be restricted (with aprental agreement) depending on your POV, but to say it's to relieve the burden on parents- that's incredibly awful

I think their emphasis is actually on their pockets.They are thinking of the burden on the NHS. Money is more important to them than the lives of these children.

A lot of the "painful" conditions come with the less severe disabilities (arthritis for example). A lot of children with profound learning difficulties are not in pain.

excellent post wannabe.

Also pondering further, many of the most severely disabled children I know are disabled because health professionals cocked up their birth. So what's going to happen. "sorry mrs x we cocked that one up- he;ll be severely disabled so we'd better knock him on the head- relieve you of your burden love".

i have read the article, and what i think it is sying is that medics should not go to extraordinarry lengths to ext4end the lives of disabled children. and that society should debate the options of euthanasia.
its not about doctors killing newborns. its about society taqlking about how much medical intervention should be given. very similar to the abortion debate. why is it ok to termminate t 8 weeks, but not t 38 weeks?/ such painful topics.
and i dont think tht parents of newborn disabled children are actully in an emotionally healthy place to discuss such things.
deliberate killing of newborns imo should always be called murder.

What about the deliberate killing of babies in utero? Where is the line to be drawn?

Although I am sure many might disagree with me but I feel the line should be drawn at conception. Life is too rare and valuable to be done away with.

Well I am pro-abortion but I am also pro-life and the whole thing confuses the hell out of me. On the one hand I think that women should have the choice, on the other I think that aborting a healthy and viable foetus because your condom split is an awful thing to do. I also think that aborting a downs foetus or a foetus with cleft palate is akin to murder. Once the baby is born I am in another conundrum because I want all babies to have a chance of life but I don't want them to go through unnecessary suffering and how is that line drawn. I also fell that doctors are not to be trusted in all cases but that parents may not do what is right because of the huge emotional strain.