Baby Born Alive at Abortion Clinic - then Killed

William Haskins

poet
Kind Benefactor
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
29,099
Reaction score
8,848
Age
58
Website
www.poisonpen.net
to me it comes down to viability. not as a moral measure, but certainly as an argument that the child can sustain a life separate from the mother and should therefore be afforded the same human rights as any other individual.
 

ricetalks

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
665
Reaction score
48
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
There's a difference between killing a fetus as it's being born and a baby that is born with a ticking timebomb. If you can't see that I don't know what to tell you. The comparison is ridiculous.

Also, a baby is considered a fetus until it's born. Makes it easier to dehumanize, I guess, for some.
Yes, but Iguess the point of why I meantioned this is this.

This woman was Catholic. She was told when she was pregnant that the baby would likely be still born, if it survived full term to be born. And if it was born, the likelyhood of it surviving was extrememly low. (Almost nil, to be more exact). And if it did survive, it would be EXTREMELY handicapped. It would likely be institutionalize for the rest of its life.

She, being Catholic, was against abortion and therefore did not abort the fetus. When it was born and died three hours later, they named it, christened it, and had a fairly long funeral service for it. And then, a year later, they had a anniversary funeral service for it.

How did any of this help this woman deal with the most unfortunate circumstances she found herself in? To this day she still talks about 'her daughter' as though it was a viable life. My naming it and christening it, she gave it a personality.

In my view, and this has been bared out to some degree by her continuing behaviour, this woman has been completely truamatized by her own beliefs and the type of conselling she recieved afterwards. It didn't help her deal withthe emotional truama at all. In fact, in my view it harmed her.

Not all life is sacred. When I disconnected my brother, he was fundementally dead, even though his heart was still beating and he was still breathing on a resperator. Was there life going on inside him? Sure there was. But it wasn't human life. It wasn't the life as I knew him.

When they asked me if they should just disconnect him and let him die on his own, which would have taken possibly three to four hours, or give him a large dose of painkillers to help him pass away (and you can take issue with the word and idea of 'help him' if you want), I chose have a large dose of painkillers administered to help him on his way.

Should we respect life? Absolutely. But part of that respect for life has to also come down to the quality of life. Not just a heartbeat.
 

TerzaRima

Absinthe O'Malice
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 20, 2008
Messages
3,340
Reaction score
892
Location
the foulest in the land
Sycloria watched in horror and shock as her baby writhed with her chest rising and falling as she breathed.

This is great purple prose, and I kind of admire it on that level, but a 23 week baby just does not have the muscle tone to "writhe". And I can't believe that spontaneous breathing went on for five minutes.

We're all writers here, and so should be more savvy of the ways we are manipulated by the media than your average consumer, not less.
 

William Haskins

poet
Kind Benefactor
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
29,099
Reaction score
8,848
Age
58
Website
www.poisonpen.net
babies as premature as 21 weeks have survived. there is no excuse for not immediately seeking proper medical care for this child.
 

ricetalks

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
665
Reaction score
48
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
This is great purple prose, and I kind of admire it on that level, but a 23 week baby just does not have the muscle tone to "writhe". And I can't believe that spontaneous breathing went on for five minutes.

We're all writers here, and so should be more savvy of the ways we are manipulated by the media than your average consumer, not less.

Agreed. This struck me as fishy. In fact, the more I hear about this story and the way its told, the more I keep thinking, 'propaganda'.
 

ColoradoGuy

I've seen worse.
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 11, 2005
Messages
6,696
Reaction score
1,534
Location
The City Different
Website
www.chrisjohnsonmd.com
This is not an uncommon ethical problem (although the clinical setting here is strange) -- what to do after the precipitous delivery of what overwhelming statistical evidence shows is an unviable infant. All signs in this case are that the medical care this woman received was atrocious. Proper medical care would have been to discuss the situation with the mother and allow her to choose. In my experience, virtually all parents in this situation, when given all the information, choose not to attempt to resuscitate the infant.

ETA: I very much doubt if anyone there was even aware of how to handle this sort of situation, medically or ethically. Resuscitating an infant like this requires a very high level of training, experience, and skill. I'm certain no one at this office had those skills.
 
Last edited:

rugcat

Lost in the Fog
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
16,339
Reaction score
4,110
Location
East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
Website
www.jlevitt.com
to me it comes down to viability. not as a moral measure, but certainly as an argument that the child can sustain a life separate from the mother and should therefore be afforded the same human rights as any other individual.
That's not a bad test, but with medical advances, it's not inconceivable that someday a fetus at any stage of development could be considered viable, with proper medical intervention.

Already, a premature birth that would have zero chance of surviving on its own outside the womb can be saved. Advances in medical technology always present ethical dilemmas.
 

Monkey

Is me.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 12, 2007
Messages
9,119
Reaction score
1,881
Location
Texas, usually
It does if you are positing the question from the position that HUMAN life can NEVER be taken. So first you have to define "life," and then you have to go one step further and define "human life" and explain why it differs from any other form of life.

Life =/= Soul

We can prove that there is life. We cannot prove that there is a soul.

For many, these two things are synonymous. But not for everyone. I can see the usefulness of discussing what constitutes life, but not of discussing what constitutes soul.

Now I personally agree that questions about "the soul" have no place in legal decision making. But it DOES impact our culture on deep emotional levels, regardless of whether or not it has no place in the realm of law.

Yes, we agree there. I know that this is a deeply emotional issue for people, and that their views on this will impact thier thinking on abortion.

But it's still an article of faith. The person who believes a soul comes in when the baby is still a zygote can't convince the one who believes there's no such thing as a soul. The person who believes the soul comes in with the brain waves can't convince the person who believes it happens with the heart beat. Since we can't prove anything about a soul--not even that it exists--arguing this point is a distraction from the conversation at hand and nothing more.
 

TerzaRima

Absinthe O'Malice
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 20, 2008
Messages
3,340
Reaction score
892
Location
the foulest in the land
In my experience, virtually all parents in this situation, when given all the information, choose not to attempt to resuscitate the infant.

When given all the information, yes. I worked with a very aggressive neonatologist during my residency, and he viewed these tiny beings as some kind of challenge to his supahfly resuscitation skills. In talking to parents, he managed to minimize things like intracranial bleeds and perforated bowels, and so of course they wanted everything possible done.

He once made everybody prep for a possible resuscitation for a woman who was miscarrying at 21 weeks. It was awful.
 

Cranky

Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
14,945
Reaction score
8,145
This is not an uncommon ethical problem (although the clinical setting here is strange) -- what to do after the precipitous delivery of what overwhelming statistical evidence shows is an unviable infant. All signs in this case are that the medical care this woman received was atrocious. Proper medical care would have been to discuss the situation with the mother and allow her to choose. In my experience, virtually all parents in this situation, when given all the information, choose not to attempt to resuscitate the infant.

ETA: I very much doubt if anyone there was even aware of how to handle this sort of situation, medically or ethically. Resuscitating an infant like this requires a very high level of training, experience, and skill. I'm certain no one at this office had those skills.

Or the equipment. But they had what they needed, I'm sure: a telephone to call 911 with.
 

ColoradoGuy

I've seen worse.
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 11, 2005
Messages
6,696
Reaction score
1,534
Location
The City Different
Website
www.chrisjohnsonmd.com
Or the equipment. But they had what they needed, I'm sure: a telephone to call 911 with.
Except that I've never heard of a paramedic rig that carries the equipment or the personnel to attempt something like this. This whole thing is an anecdote (which, after all, is what it is) with highly-charged implications and emotions. But there is a principle in medical ethics that deals with futile care -- physicians are not required to provide futile care, and it is even unethical to do so. What was crucial here would be the mother's wishes -- the medical ethical principle of autonomy. It was unethical not to take that into account.
 

Cranky

Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
14,945
Reaction score
8,145
Except that I've never heard of a paramedic rig that carries the equipment or the personnel to attempt something like this. This whole thing is an anecdote (which, after all, is what it is) with highly-charged implications and emotions. But there is a principle in medical ethics that deals with futile care -- physicians are not required to provide futile care, and it is even unethical to do so. What was crucial here would be the mother's wishes -- the medical ethical principle of autonomy. It was unethical not to take that into account.

Ah, I see. Fair enough. Clearly, if what is said here is true, they really failed this young lady at almost every point. I don't even think she really had informed consent as to what was really going to happen.

And if they simply threw the baby away, without any attempt, however slim, to help, I'm just disgusted. I'm sorry, but that just really, really bothers me.
 

ColoradoGuy

I've seen worse.
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 11, 2005
Messages
6,696
Reaction score
1,534
Location
The City Different
Website
www.chrisjohnsonmd.com
And if they simply threw the baby away, without any attempt, however slim, to help, I'm just disgusted. I'm sorry, but that just really, really bothers me.
I agree. It's just that help -- true help -- would be to assess the situation, apply proper principles, and proceed from there. Help is not necessarily attempting to resuscitate the infant.
 

Cranky

Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
14,945
Reaction score
8,145
I agree. It's just that help -- true help -- would be to assess the situation, apply proper principles, and proceed from there. Help is not necessarily attempting to resuscitate the infant.

I understand, since the baby was clearly not ready to be born yet, and even if she could have been saved, odds were that she would have had many, many challenges.

I just shudder at treating this child like trash.
 

Plot Device

A woman said to write like a man.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 14, 2007
Messages
11,973
Reaction score
1,866
Location
Next to the dirigible docking station
Website
sandwichboardroom.blogspot.com
Even if the mother had chosen not to resucitate the infant, tossing the kid while still alive into a red plastic biohazard bag and then tossing THAT bag into the trash is unacceptable.

Part of the law concerning abortion includes the fact that it's considered nothing but a medical procedure, not a birth. And so that means that neither a birth certificate nor a death certificate get issued during an abortion.

But that child in that Florida clinic was "born." So a birth certificate should have been issued, medical care should have been admininistered, and then if the mother had chosen not to resucitate, a death certificate should have been issued after the child passed away. And then when that was all done, the correct procedures for handing over the body to the family members with the assistance of a licensed funeral home director should have been followed.

Instead, that kid was just "a clump of cells" tossed into a bio-hazard bag.
 

Cranky

Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
14,945
Reaction score
8,145
Even if the mother had chosen not to resucitate the infant, tossing the kid while still alive into a red plastic biohazard bag and then tossing THAT bag into the trash is unacceptable.

Part of the law concerning abortion includes the fact that it's considered nothing but a medical procedure, not a birth. And so that means that neither a birth certificate nor a death certificate get issued during an abortion.

But that child in that Florida clinic was "born." So a birth certificate should have been issued, medical care should have been admininistered, and then if the mother had chosen not to resucitate, a death certificate should have been issued after the child passed away. And then when that was all done, the correct procedures for handing over the body to the family members with the assistance of a licensed funeral home director should have been followed.

Instead, that kid was just "a clump of cells" tossed into a bio-hazard bag.


Yes. Exactly.
 

Ken

Banned
Kind Benefactor
Joined
Dec 28, 2007
Messages
11,478
Reaction score
6,198
Location
AW. A very nice place!
Life =/= Soul

...true; a thing can be alive without a soul, but it can not be human w/o one according to most religious and some philosophical doctrines. Not saying I agree, but the arguments and sermons are persuasive.
 

William Haskins

poet
Kind Benefactor
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
29,099
Reaction score
8,848
Age
58
Website
www.poisonpen.net
superstition aside. if a premature baby is born alive, it has all recourse to the rights of any other person in our society.

every effort should have been made to keep it alive.
 

Rarri

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
717
Reaction score
84
Location
UK
There could have been an element of dignity involved, a still birth (or medical termination - ie child not surviving birth) wouldn't have been treated like that.
 

ColoradoGuy

I've seen worse.
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 11, 2005
Messages
6,696
Reaction score
1,534
Location
The City Different
Website
www.chrisjohnsonmd.com
superstition aside. if a premature baby is born alive, it has all recourse to the rights of any other person in our society.
True, which I believe means basic medical care (although many dispute this, as you know).
every effort should have been made to keep it alive.
But as I noted upthread, babies of this gestation are born in other, more reasonable circumstances, and usually their parents choose not to resuscitate them. So we don't make every effort to keep every live-born infant alive. We can talk about the ethics of this situation in particular (which I agree are shameful) or the general ethical principles, but the fact remains that we do allow 23 week-gestation infants to die, albeit in much more dignified circumstances. This case is dreadful.
 

Wavy_Blue

Adventure is out there!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 24, 2008
Messages
878
Reaction score
64
Location
Neverland
This story makes me sick.

Now I'm going to walk away from the discussion and not click on this thread ever again.
 

DamaNegra

Mexican on the loose!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Messages
6,260
Reaction score
1,358
Location
Scotland
Website
www.fictionpress.com
Should we respect life? Absolutely. But part of that respect for life has to also come down to the quality of life. Not just a heartbeat.

Quoted for truth. I'm a firm believer that life shouldn't be kept for the sake of itself. Quality of life is seriously important. A baby whom his/hers parents wanted to abort is not going to have much in the way of quality of life.
 

Christine N.

haz a shiny new book cover
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
7,705
Reaction score
1,336
Location
Where the Wild Things Are
Website
www.christine-norris.com
I DO agree that this was an absolute horrid thing - the way the doctor handled it was despicable. It definitely could have been handled better, with more tact and dignity. It's just as sad as a woman forced to go through the pain of labor when they know the baby is stillborn. At least those doctors have bedside manor.

Terribly sad, and completely the wrong way to handle it.