Holland to allow ‘baby euthanasia’

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 07:16 AM
link   



WHEN Frank and Anita’s daughter Chanou was born with an extremely rare, incurable illness in August 2000, they knew that her life would be short and battled against the odds to make it happy.
They struggled around the clock against their baby’s pain. “We tried all sorts of things,” said Anita, a 37-year-old local government worker. “She cried all the time. Every time I touched her it hurt.”

Chanou was suffering from a metabolic disorder that had resulted in abnormal bone development. Doctors gave her no more than 30 months to live. “We felt terrible watching her suffer,” said Anita at their home near Amsterdam. “We felt we were letting her down.”


www.timesonline.co.uk...

Great........ murdering babies inside the womb is no longer good enough for the "challenge life" crowd, now let's murder them anytime anywhere.........

Many great scientist like Steven Hawkings would never have a chance.




posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 07:30 AM
link   
Quality of life should always take precedence over quantity. Realistically, the severely handicapped are a drain on resources.

The Dutch are a progressive people. They think long-range and shape their policies accordingly. Their take on the value of human life and the importance of human dignity is not all that unusual for Europe, a scientifically advanced area of the world.

It is unfortunate that the US is still so mired in mysticism that it, proverbially, cannot see the forest for the trees.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 07:47 AM
link   


Many great scientist like Steven Hawkings would never have a chance.


So now you're making sweeping generalizations, saying all children born with disorders have the same disorder? You do realize doctors can tell which disorder a child has before they are born, no?

I think hte poster above has the right idea, it's quality, not quantity. There are some infants born who have such underdeveloped lungs that they will literally feel like they are burning from the inside out with every breath. There are others born missing lobes of their brain who will basically suffer from seizures every day of their lives and will never even be able to move on their own, let alone experience anything. Do you think these poor souls should be made to stay in this world? That's a horrid and gruesome idea. Doesn't the Bible say something about compassion?

~MFP



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bibliophile
Quality of life should always take precedence over quantity. Realistically, the severely handicapped are a drain on resources.

The Dutch are a progressive people. They think long-range and shape their policies accordingly. Their take on the value of human life and the importance of human dignity is not all that unusual for Europe, a scientifically advanced area of the world.

It is unfortunate that the US is still so mired in mysticism that it, proverbially, cannot see the forest for the trees.


When almighty MANKIND can create a complete human being "from scatch" without any source of ingredients from the creator then perhaps we can speak about throwing away "life".

Life....all life is a miracle. Period. When "quality" becomes part of the calculation to end life "all life" is in danger................who the hell is qualified to judge "quality"? Do we kill all those whose eyes need correction? How about ugly people, or fat/skinny. How about certain races? African-american are at a disadvantage, should we end them too?

This is a horrid concept............................



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by thermopolis

...This is a horrid concept...


On the contrary, it is realistic for this day and age. Mankind stands at 6.5 billion and counting. Resources are not unlimited. Our planet is being taxed to its limits by overpopulation. We must face the fact that not everyone can or should be saved.

Survival of the fittest has historically prevailed via either Mother Nature or the hand of man himself. Nothing is going to change that. Holland is simply the vanguard in this particular issue.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by thermopolis

Many great scientist like Steven Hawkings would never have a chance.

He isn't in a lot of pain, and he developed his disease later in his life. He used to row in the Oxford rowing team.

I'm sick and tired of these pro-life idiots (I don't mean you, thermopolis) creaming ooh that poor baby, those cruel Dutch...
Face it; the baby is in a lot of pain, and has no chance of a normal life. She better off dead.

Quote from her mother: "It made me feel at peace inside to know that she wasn’t suffering any more.”



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by thermopolis
Great........ murdering babies inside the womb is no longer good enough for the "challenge life" crowd, now let's murder them anytime anywhere.........

I find it difficult to believe you care about human life when you are so quick to use a family's torment as your own personal soapbox. The baby was obviously in great suffering and it's parents decided to show it mercy.. yet you think it would've been better for it to spend it's short life in agony? Where is this compassion you speak of?



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bibliophile[/I]
Quality of life should always take precedence over quantity. The Dutch are a progressive people. They think long-range and shape their policies accordingly. Their take on the value of human life and the importance of human dignity is not all that unusual for Europe, a scientifically advanced area of the world. It is unfortunate that the US is still so mired in mysticism that it, proverbially, cannot see the forest for the trees.


I knew early in my life I did not want children. Children are a hell of a lot of work and offer dam little reward. My authority? I was a child once. On the other hand, after a child is born, I think we adults have an obligation to furnish each and every child the best health care, good wholesome food, decent and safe housing, adequate clothes, and an education that will equip each child to be a contributor and not a taker only.

In the good old days, say before the 1950s, it was accepted medical practice by the delivering physician of a handicapped or deformed child to “set it aside” to die peacefully. I don’t know if Steven Hawking’s disability was recognizable at his birth, and I surely do admire him and his wonderful brain, but had I have been his obstetrician and I knew his fate, he would not be here today. As for the fate of a fetus, to me that is a non-issue. The woman must have the choice. Medical technology has outstripped our sense of social responsibility.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bibliophile

Originally posted by thermopolis

...This is a horrid concept...


On the contrary, it is realistic for this day and age. Mankind stands at 6.5 billion and counting. Resources are not unlimited. Our planet is being taxed to its limits by overpopulation. We must face the fact that not everyone can or should be saved.

Survival of the fittest has historically prevailed via either Mother Nature or the hand of man himself. Nothing is going to change that. Holland is simply the vanguard in this particular issue.


So based on "too many" humans we should start the german gas chambers up again? Jews were deemed "sub-human" AFTER the murder of the handicapped and retarded in Germany.

So if I think say "paris" has too many residents it is OK to kill off a few thousand? By that logic China and India are screwing up the planet for the rest of us, so perhaps they should "nuke" each other for the betterment of th planet.

Complete lunacy isn't it?

Suposedly back in the good old 60's the max world popluation was 5 billion, or we would all starve to death. At 6.5 billion now that was kinda stupid...........



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 01:16 PM
link   
A person with a nuclear bomb in his avatar is trying to lecture others about the sanctity of life


If a person is in persistent pain and there's no hope of them ever having a good life then it may be better to end their life.

I think Holland has made the right decision.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by AceOfBase
A person with a nuclear bomb in his avatar is trying to lecture others about the sanctity of life


If a person is in persistent pain and there's no hope of them ever having a good life then it may be better to end their life.

I think Holland has made the right decision.



So a person with a "crusader" sheild in his avatar, sign of a "templar" knight, sworn to defend the "helpless" thinks its OK to murder on the basis of genetic defect? Where does one draw the line there "knight"?

How about short people? Dwarfs, etc..........



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by thermopolis

...thinks its OK to murder on the basis of genetic defect? Where does one draw the line there "knight"?

How about short people? Dwarfs, etc..........



Correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't this about killing the severely disabled regardless of the actual cause? means if it was heavy metal poisoning, they'd still kill the baby, wouldn't they?

I personally *think* that arguing about life on the web is cheap compared to the decision the mother has to make, isn't it?



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by thermopolis

So based on "too many" humans we should start the german gas chambers up again? Jews were deemed "sub-human" AFTER the murder of the handicapped and retarded in Germany.

So if I think say "paris" has too many residents it is OK to kill off a few thousand? By that logic China and India are screwing up the planet for the rest of us, so perhaps they should "nuke" each other for the betterment of th planet.


No one here has made any of these statements. We have simply posted logical viewpoints regarding the reasons the Dutch have decided to pursue this particular course.

I have posted only a portion of my viewpoint regarding this issue. The decision to end a life that has no hope of being one of quality is a humanitarian gesture.

We do not allow our animals to suffer when they are in pain. It is foolish to deny this same relief to people. Death with dignity should be the norm, not the exception.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 06:17 PM
link   
How very progressive.

I have been wondering when this is going t come into play for years. Of course, there are guidelines that will have to be drawn, and do these rules apply to the elderly and infirm who, of their own cognition, wish to be "put to rest"?

One can only hope. That said, Ido not condone suicide, but once already faced with insurmountable medical bills, and a bleak outcome, then who is to say it isn't your choice to make?

Kudos to the Mom who had the nerve to make the correct choice for her child.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 06:34 PM
link   
firstly Stephen hawking had motor neurone disease (apologies for spelling) this did not develop until his early 20s i think, definatly not until he was at university. So that part of your argument has gone.

Secondly, i believe the mother and doctors made the correct choice in making the decision to allow the baby to die. It was in obvious pain and suffering and no body should go through that.

Parts of america have a far to extreme view when it come to pro-life...even GW has a ridiculous view on this subject. IMO the quality of someones life is far more important than the quantity.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 07:09 PM
link   
I'm in agreement with those who've posted before me on this, who consider this positive.

It is a progressive step.

Why should you force a baby to grow up/live with a horrible disease that will cause them pain, or a neural deformity that basically makes them unable to be on their own.


When I was in middle school, there was a girl in the Special Education class, there was a teacher with her holding her hand all the time, and all the girl did, apart from walk with the teacher, was flail around and make screaming noises. The girl had been born with a section of her brain not developed, and other parts of her brain damaged.

Now I stated that to state my point.
Why would you want a child to live a life like that?



EDIT:
Fixed spelling.

[edit on 3/6/2006 by iori_komei]



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei
Now I stated that to state my point.
Why would you want a child to live a life like that?


Because she is a human being.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by LostSailor

Because she is a human being.


There is more to consider here than the simple fact of her existence.

If existence is enough then a blank canvas may pass for fine art in every instance. We know very well that this is not the case.

The primary consideration here is that the child was in pain. When one is in pain one is not interested in doing anything but alleviating that pain. Another analogy is the American Lung Association's tagline - When you can't breath, nothing else matters.

Humans thrive through personal growth and by experiencing diversity. This would never have been an option for this child. She would have spent her brief life suffering, oblivious to the world around her.

Would you really consign someone to this existence simply because he is alive and human? One must question the values of an individual who would allow a fellow human being to suffer in this way.

Some would not call this humanity at all, but what it is - sadism.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 09:33 PM
link   
How is it so many on this website are so quick to end life? Is life so cheap now? Life from a few billion atoms formed together is a miracle.

Stop and think of the wonder of that miracle. Please any of you that can create it, show me, tell me.

Disposable "souls" from the breath of life given by the creator of all things. This must be how it was before the flood when God remorsed over the evil man had created and the evil done unto man by man.

Steal life from the least of us and there will all too soon be none left to steal.

I am ashamed to be human..............All life is precious..............



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 10:05 PM
link   
okay, let's put it into religious terms for just a minute, here's this new soul, just arrived on planet earth. unfortunately, she is not developed right. as a result, she will struggle her first three years of life, enduring operation after operation, that is, if she happens to be either born into a country that has found the sanity of providing her with healthcare regardless of her parents income....if she lives in TX, or a few other place, well, she'll only get this treatment if her parents are extremely rich!! okay, so she undergoes operation after operation, all the while suffering, and all the while struggling, just to live. and never, ever able to even come close to reaching the full potential of being human.

why?? would she have lived if it wasn't for our great medical system, wouldn't she had died soon after birth. and well, what do you think would have happened to that new soul after death? would it have gone back to god? or maybe be given another chance at live, maybe this time with a healthy body? what do you think would have been the worst that could have happened, she would have been deprived of a life of suffering and pain?
our medical system can be either a blessing or a curse. it can keep us healthy, so we can live a life relatively free from pain, disablity, and early death...
or it can also serve to prolong our death, and thus increase our agony and pain.
the first, I believe serves a higher purpose of good, the latter though, could only serve to make our world a darker, more miserable place.

christians are susposed to welcome death when it comes, without fear, with faith that the loving creator waits to welcome them.
why fear death when it comes to those who are too weak, ill, and quite frankly in so much pain that they would be willing to accept death themselves?
would you rather that life be spent here on this earth, in pain or misery, or would you rather it be spend in the arms of the creator?





new topics
top topics
 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join