Preemie Baby saved because scissors were left on scale

Originally posted by CalebRight14

The UK apparently does not work to save preemies that weigh under a pound, as they are not deemed "viable". This baby was given treatment, mistakenly because scissors were left on the scale when she was weighed. It was discovered later, but she was already being taken care of. She is now home with her parents, and reportedly doing well.

She was born with a twin sister, who died a few weeks after birth... One must wonder if it was a result of her not being "viable", and thus not receiving any care.

This is what happens when government decides who gets care and who doesn't. Coming to a US state near you soon. Enjoy all you voted for in 2008 and 2012


www.theblaze.com...

I can't believe you've used a non-story like this and embellished it to push your agenda.
Shame on you.

Originally posted by CalebRight14

The UK apparently does not work to save preemies that weigh under a pound, as they are not deemed "viable". This baby was given treatment, mistakenly because scissors were left on the scale when she was weighed. It was discovered later, but she was already being taken care of. She is now home with her parents, and reportedly doing well.

She was born with a twin sister, who died a few weeks after birth... One must wonder if it was a result of her not being "viable", and thus not receiving any care.

This is what happens when government decides who gets care and who doesn't. Coming to a US state near you soon. Enjoy all you voted for in 2008 and 2012


www.theblaze.com...

I'm cool with that.

This is what happens when government decides who gets care and who doesn't. Coming to a US state near you soon.

reply to post by CalebRight14


As though to imply that the UK healthcare-wise is at all in any way in a worse state than the US.

Fortunately it is not the case. Given the number of people in the US who state they now read and comment on British news articles and sites since they can't trust their own sites to provide relevant stories (Honestly, how bad do news sources have to be for the likes of the Daily Mail to be seen as a shining light reprieve?), I would've thought they'd have a greater understanding of British current affairs.

The OP shows otherwise.

This is what happens when government decides who gets care and who doesn't. Coming to a US state near you soon.

The US government DOES choose who gets what care. Those with enough money get higher levels of care than those with less money.

The perfect demonstration of a two-tier system. The wealthy get and the poor don't.

Originally posted by PaddyInf

The wealthy get and the poor don't.

Isnt that the "American dream" they keep on about ?

www.youtube.com...

Seems your fellow Americans have a different opinion of the NHS.

reply to post by Alekto


Let me inbed it for you.




Long live the NHS!!!

I'm very pro the NHS. And The weight would be guidelies probably for the sanity of the parents and medical staff. If they can't save a child below a certain weight then it's not their fault, tey were up against it.

However, things aren't as Rosey as they were 30 years ago.

The NHS is in decay, Thatcher began it and it's continued with each and every successive government. I certainly wouldn't trade it for the US system. Hand in hand with the NHS decay comes the gradual march of privatisation.

Ironically the NHS is only worsening as it moves towards an privatised US system.

Originally posted by CalebRight14

The UK apparently does not work to save preemies that weigh under a pound, as they are not deemed "viable". This baby was given treatment, mistakenly because scissors were left on the scale when she was weighed. It was discovered later, but she was already being taken care of. She is now home with her parents, and reportedly doing well.

She was born with a twin sister, who died a few weeks after birth... One must wonder if it was a result of her not being "viable", and thus not receiving any care.

This is what happens when government decides who gets care and who doesn't. Coming to a US state near you soon. Enjoy all you voted for in 2008 and 2012


www.theblaze.com...

Currently insurance companies make decisions whether you are allowed to get care or not. It is not exclusive to government.

Yes as hard as it is to believe that are retarded un ethical people in the private sector.... i know it is mind shattering.

I do not disagree that government being invovled in healthcare will be a bad thing but the current system has the same type of problems as well.

Except people are ready to try something different. which one is better or worse is debatable. I have known people who end up dieing because no one will insure them or they are denied further care...under the current system.

The grass is always greener on the other side. as long as people can exploit other people for profit whether it be in the hands of government or the private sector it will always continue to happen that some fall victim to their bad decisions based on greed.


Also all your post does is exploit peoples love of children to grind your political axe. YOu are no different than those who use healthcare as a tool for their agenda.

should the outrage be any different if this happened in the private sector??

reply to post by crazyewok


Go do your research. Hospitals that don't waste time on the old and sick newborns get more funding for there hospital. Your comment is fed from what you heard on the news. Take them time you use to read this site to actually learn something new.

There is so much misinformation here it's insane. I have an entire family in the medical profession and my wife works in the NICU. I can't hardly click on this section because of all those that have NO idea... misinformation coming from all sides. You can't even argue it, because a lot of people here are arguing two wrong ideas, lol.

reply to post by AmateuRN


There is a great deal of medical misinformation on this site. Please don't hesitate to use your medical experience to set the record straight for those that are misinformed, take the opportunity to teach!

The standard that the medical profession goes by is this....a baby at 24 weeks gestation is considered "viable" or able to survive outside the womb. Younger than 20 weeks is not considered viable due to the severe immaturity of the lungs (there is more but the lungs are the biggest obstacle) . Artificial surfactants, intubation and traching a tiny premie will almost always introduce pneumonia and infection with prolonged intubation and make it even harder for a premie to survive. Sometimes I have heard my daughter (that is a NICU nurse) tell me that it's so hard to watch these little babies struggle to live when the nurses and doctors are doing all they can to help a baby survive and it's not helping and they are going downhill, death is their only way to peace. But also, miracles can happen and some will overcome all odds and live through all of this. I don't know if that is about the baby's will to live or God granting miracles. My personal opinion is to give life a chance if there is a small chance at survival.

Originally posted by justsaying
But also, miracles can happen and some will overcome all odds and live through all of this. I don't know if that is about the baby's will to live or God granting miracles. My personal opinion is to give life a chance if there is a small chance at survival.

They do "give life a chance". Despite what the original, very misinformed source stated, if a baby is breathing then the hospital staff will give it a go. The fact is though when a child is born before 24 weeks the chances are they won't be breathing anyway because their lungs aren't mature enough. Pretty much all babies born before 38 weeks (which is the definition of a premature birth) require some degree of steroid treatment to try to mature the lungs quicker to give the best outcome. Prior to 24 weeks this treatment is almost always unsuccessful as they simply aren't developed enough to function.

Current guidelines state that resuscitation attempts prior to 24 weeks should only be carried out in controlled trials as there are too many variables and these attempts should be used to develop better treatment guidelines and methods to improve survivability. Most consultants however will give it a fair crack of the whip from 22 weeks onward. Prior to that your are realistically looking at a well-developed foetus.

I think what this thread has demonstrated is the need to research a topic before relying on a fairly suspect original source when starting a thread. The blaze is pretty much just an internet tabloid who do little to no real research into their stories, much like any other tabloid.

Originally posted by justsaying
reply to post by AmateuRN

 

There is a great deal of medical misinformation on this site. Please don't hesitate to use your medical experience to set the record straight for those that are misinformed, take the opportunity to teach!

The standard that the medical profession goes by is this....a baby at 24 weeks gestation is considered "viable" or able to survive outside the womb. Younger than 20 weeks is not considered viable due to the severe immaturity of the lungs (there is more but the lungs are the biggest obstacle) . Artificial surfactants, intubation and traching a tiny premie will almost always introduce pneumonia and infection with prolonged intubation and make it even harder for a premie to survive. Sometimes I have heard my daughter (that is a NICU nurse) tell me that it's so hard to watch these little babies struggle to live when the nurses and doctors are doing all they can to help a baby survive and it's not helping and they are going downhill, death is their only way to peace. But also, miracles can happen and some will overcome all odds and live through all of this. I don't know if that is about the baby's will to live or God granting miracles. My personal opinion is to give life a chance if there is a small chance at survival.

You have to look at potential quality of life not just survival.
Virtually any prem baby can be kept alive.
It's how they develop and what problems they will have as they grow is the more important thing.

I worked on a paed ICU and watched my friend's son (who was born at 26 weeks) remain on and off there for 18 months before he finally died after having (yet another) a respiratory arrest. The agony my friend's family went through was indescribable.
He wasn't the first baby (or will be the last) for that to happen to either.

Unfortunately there's no hand of god in these situations either.