How can you just let a baby suffer?

page: 1
2

log in

join

posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:48 AM
link   
This recount by a doctor(s) regarding treatment of newborns who due to some birth defects are put on a pathway for death. Basically what that means is that a child who is so sick or riddled with issues will in essence in some case be denied food and liquids and basically left to starve to death and die...this has nothing to do with religion or with politics..it's a simple question on humanity...how can we let someone so small suffer


Link

Again your a donkey if you bring up religion or politics because I'm not looking for a fight and I don't want people arguing on here...just be sincere




posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:52 AM
link   
reply to post by chrismarco
 


If you were given a 5% chance of survival, would you take?



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   
When my boy was born it changed my life. I saw kids in a whole new light. Before it was, ''someone shut that screaming kid up!'' Now it's, ''aah, look at the screaming baby
''

How doctors could starve a poorly newborn is beyond me. Isn't there a way to put them out of their misery in a more humane way?

If a newborn has no chance of survival, how can they justify starving the poor thing?

From the source. (Speaking about withdrawing food and fluids)

Writing in a leading medical journal, the physician revealed the process can take an average of ten days during which a baby becomes ‘smaller and shrunken’.


That is a horrible image in my head now. I couldn't read the rest of the source. Too sad.
edit on 30-11-2012 by SilentE because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by chrismarco
 


Its done because TPTB are heartless and following the pied piper. This tortuous death would be like one of their sacrifices.

There can be no other reason.

Medically you do all you can to save a life. Otherwise its hospice. If someone isn't viable (by the way, viable does not mean, handicapped or deformed, because the constitution protect all life, viable means, not being viable would mean the baby is dying on its own with intervention) You surround them with love, good care, nourishment, prayers, and let them be held in the arms of love until their last breath. It shouldn't be lack fo food killing them for that is MURDER.



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:57 AM
link   
I think the baby should be given food, warmth, and love until it dies. If it were my baby I'd take it home and provide for him or her myself. Are the hospitals denying access to the baby to the parents? Is there anything keeping the parents from taking the baby home to die? If it is going to die anyway then why not release it to go home to die?
Probably the parents are talked into doing this pathway. If they wanted to care for the baby at home until it dies, are they allowed to do this?

If this is the only life the baby has, it should not die alone and starving. I believe the baby is aware that it is loved, has food and warmth. Even if it is dying I think it knows something is wrong if it is alone and no one answers its cries. If the baby only has a days or hours, it should at least know love.


JAK

posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   
This topic is already available here:

UK doctor admits to practice of euthanizing babies and children.

Please visit that thread for further information and comment.

Thank you,

Jak





new topics
top topics
 
2

log in

join