23 Week Babies - anyone watching?

[deemented]

About to start on bbc2 now.

My boys were prem and my friend has a 23 weeker.

Tissues at the ready.

ALPINE, I no longer live in Holland and no I haven't seen the programme - sorry. Yes I am well aware of the different words in Dutch which are common language and which here in the UK are unacceptable.I am extremely uncomfortable with the Dutch word for Gay, among others. However there are certain cases where the Dutch people are accepting that some language needs to change (for example the chocolate teacakes are no longer neggerkusjes! And rightly so!). 20 years ago it was quite acceptable, here in the UK, to refer to someone with Downs as a Mongol and at that time it also wasn't meant in a derogatory way. Things change and societies progress and realise that some things are not conducive to respectful living and attempt to change attitudes/language accordingly. I believe (and it is my belief, which I have a right to) that in Holland, socially things haven't progressed so far, and because I was raised in the UK and experienced the changes in acceptable attitudes and language I really struggle with much of their language used every day in Holland. Add to that the whole Sinterklas Festival which I think is great, but which in order to be respectful could do with a few changes here and there. I don't believe that many people would find it acceptable for Sinterklas (similar but different to Santa) to have little black slaves! However it is defended as a crucial part of Dutch tradition......... I like Sinterklas but really struggle with this aspect ( think this is actually for another thread tbh so will lkeave it there)

THUMBWITCH- I think Alpine was treying to draw attention to the fact that some common everyday words in Dutch would be deemed disrespectful here. I struggled with many aspects of the Dutch language for that reason. People with learning disabilities are referred to as 'achterlijk' - backwards etc. Lots more. I'm sure they are not meant disrespectfully, but I found much of the language and attitudes disrespectful probably because I grew up here, where language and attitude towards diversity changed over time.

ORICELLA I cannot say for sure that he would be euthanised, but it is a risk that I am not prepared to take. I do know that had he been born 2 years later than he had, there is every likelyhood the docs would have wanted to euthanise him based on their prognosis when he was born. It is not easy to euthanise someone and 2 doctors have to agree, but it does happen in the case of children that if the parents disagree with the decision to euthanise that they need to go to court to fight dor a court order to stop the euthanisation of their child. Personally I don't believe any parent should have to endure that, either at birth or at any point in their childs life. Wat too scary for me.

I would like to reitterate again that I am not having a go at Dutch people, just highlighting the potential issues for us as a society should we choose to adopt Dutch attitudes to saving or extinguishing life.

To take us back to the issue of 23 week gestation babies - yes do save them but please do ensure they have appropriate support throughout their lives if the need it. I think if we, as a society say they are not worth saving due to the fact they MAY be disabled, then whayt does that say about the value we place on the lives of any disabled people, whether their conditoin was apparent at birth, became apparent later or occurred as a result of an accident? Shouldn't we support any of them medically or socially?

xx

shaz - I think you are misrepresenting euthanasia in the Netherlands. There is a big difference between passive euthanasia (which is often very similar to a DNR) and active euthanasia. And besides, both are voluntary and can not be conducted by doctors without consent. But that debate is a whole other thread. And I am glad that your DS is getting the care he needs.

Back to 23 weekers - I do think there are limits to what can reasonably be done and resources are finite. I thank our lucky stars for the NHS who saved my DD when she was very young. But when I look at the expense of life saving treatment for one person and then compare it to what I deal with professionaly, I do feel uncomfortable. The money spent to save my DD, if spent in Africa or Asia, could literally have saved thousands of children. Does that mean that their lives are worth less? Does it mean that the society they live in is less civilised? I would hate to think so...

I would favour leaving the decision to the doctors, provided there are very clear guidelines in place. If you are putting the responsibility of care and support (for years and possibly decades) onto society as a whole, than it is only right that society, or doctors as its representatives, get to make that decision. It's not an easy thing to regulate/legislate - but I think that's actually what it means being part of a society

One thing that is quite interesting and relevant is that in Sweden they have a 53% survivial rate for 23 weekers (around half of which will have a disability) and even a 10% survivial rate for 22 weekers. This would suggest that we have not, as this programme implied, reached the biological limits for when babies can be helped, as in the UK we are quite far behind that in most hospitals.

From what I understand, Germany also are very aggressive in their treatment of very premature babies and have good success rates too.

some of the comments here are a bit alarming, TBH. The idea that healthcare and social services are "too expensive" is one which is very popular with eg banksters getting bonusses from bail-out money. Debbie Purdy with her triumphant "victory" for MS patients (like me) means we now have a right to be helped to top ourselves (discreetly), but curiously no right to new treatments or enough money to live on. Meaningless rights. The financial issue is one which need not detain us until all the tax evaders pay up and stop telling us our disabled friends and family members are "too expensive". Unless George Osborne wants to go on a tour of ICU prem. baby units and tell the parents to their faces that he thinks their baby is too expensive...

Oricella, I am not misrepresenting at all - sorry. In the hospital in which my DS was born, 1.5 years after he was born and after the change in the law, a couple had a baby who was paralysed from the neck down. The doctors all wanted to give the child a lethal injection (active euthanasia - not passive /DNR or withdrawal of treatment!) Thoise parents had to goto court to get an injunction to prevent the active euthanising of their daughter. If you google I'm sure you will find the story.!

I am not going to comment further here as , as per usual on MN there is an unwillngness by many to accept things which do not fit with their thinking. (no offence to anyone who is able to reason and understand). I have simply given my experience of having lived in a country where ACTIVE euthanasia is practiced not only on adults, (which if an adult chooses I am ok with) but also children who cannot choose for themselves (my issue is about parents on occasion having to go to court to stop it).

Life is not a bed of roses, but in my opinion, and it is an opinion, little lives are no less worthy of treatment than adult ones and babies should be given treatment and not just left to die. Sending many healthy, happy wishes to any little ones unfortunate enough to enter this world before thier due date.

I agree with Oricella's statement about society as a whole needing to be involved in the decision about treatment of whoever.

Alice I understand your point about not wanting anything to be decided upon in terms of it being 'too expensive' or otherwise. I think, however, that if you are referring to some of my comments then you may have misunderstood. I am against that sort of decision making BUT it is a fact that there is not enough money to go around. We cannot treat everybody and everything to the nth degree as there simply isn't enough money in the pot. So finance automatically becomes part of that decision and as a society we then support those who have the best chance of survival. This is not shocking. If you believe evolution to be true then it is what you accept is responsible for your very presence on this planet.

It doesn't mean that I think it is in any way fair.

It's all terribly shocking, life.

My DD was 1 lb 4 oz (Please forgive me for bragging I love her to bits). She had so much wrong and required so much help. She is warm, kind, extremely intelligent possibly top 5% in her year out of 60 and a gifted musician. More than that she sincerely cares about humanity. On one of her many 'serious' days in NICU we might have been asked to say goodbye because of the costs/value. I count myself so fortunate. Yes, the evolutionary theory for me is valid but Darwin was not around to see this survival of the unfittest. Perhaps my DD will give something back to humanity or the planet.