A tiny premature baby heads home!

[brandonbull]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: ericlp
HALF the friggen costs go to only 11-12% of the population... That pisses me off.

When will these repub bible thumpers ever F'en learn?????

Extremely premature babies should not be resuscitated.... The costs are too great and money can be put to better use on the 90% of the healthy babies that are born in this country.

You?re joking right? Or are we now going to decide who lives and who dies based on cost analysis?

"Sorry Mr. Smith lung transplant just cost too much money, go out and enjoy the few months you have left with your wife."

I can see those hospital meetings now: ?Ok people next week is the end of the fiscal year and we are still trying to meet budget, so if anyone comes in with expensive ailments to treat try and delay treatment as long as possible. We are also limiting blood to two pints per person, we can?t afford to purchase anymore till next week. Alright, let?s go save some lives?.?

The only time you DNR someone is when they are terminal in which case resuscitating them only delays the inevitable. Last time I check though being born was not considered a terminal condition.

It is. A soon as you are born, you are starting to die. Name one person that was born that won't die from being born.

 

[cwjerome]

Originally posted by: brandonbull
It is. A soon as you are born, you are starting to die. Name one person that was born that won't die from being born.

This is genius... on par with the Saddam Hussein comment. People will take one line from an entire post and make some asinine semantic comment that doesn't change the point.

What exactly are we to take from this profound insight, brandonbull? Is everyone who is born fair game for some penny pincher to kill because we're all going to die anyway? Does it change the point of ProfJohn's comment?

Your worthless and pathetic attempt at being clever aside, I wonder how many doctors would consider the birth of human life a terminal condition worthy of euthanasia. :roll: :roll:

Go slap yourself.

 

[blackllotus]

Originally posted by: jlbenedict
I wonder if you are aware that at 30 days post-ovulation, an embryo has more brain cells than your cold, heartless & worthless self possesses right now?

Now I am.

Originally posted by: jlbenedict
At only 10 weeks, an embryo's brain is fully developed. The only difference is the physical size.

This is just plain false. The cerebral cortex does not fully mature and become active until near the end of the 9 month gestation period.

Originally posted by: jlbenedict
Go smoke on your crack pipe and kill yourself if life is so meaningless

Conscious life is not meaningless.

 

[jlbenedict]

Originally posted by: jlbenedict
At only 10 weeks, an embryo's brain is fully developed. The only difference is the physical size.

Originally posted by: blackllotus

This is just plain false. The cerebral cortex does not fully mature and become active until near the end of the 9 month gestation period.

Yep.. I got sidetracked on my source.. my bad

Cheers
:thumbsup:

 

[Oceandevi]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: ericlp


Extremely premature babies should not be resuscitated.... The costs are too great and money can be put to better use on the 90% of the healthy babies that are born in this country.

What in the hell is wrong with you?

Hey, lets not resuscitate old people either, they are damn drain on society, look how expensive long term care is for the elderly. I mean, they are gonna die soon anyways right?

Yes that is right. Death is ok little buddy. It is natural.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: spittledip

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: spittledip
Whether or not this is normal for the baby to survive is irrelevant. No one is calling it a fetus b/c it is most obviously a baby. Would you feel ok killing this baby?

Two points:

1. Hindsight is 20/20.

2. I'm not a doctor. And even if I were one, I'm wouldn't try to diagnose a patient based on video (see Bill Frist and Teri Schiavo). But I will say this: cases like these should be reviewed on a case by case basis. Obviously, the doctors saw promising signs that prompted to them undergo the neonatal care for the infant and fortunately it worked out in the end. But don't think that its always going to be the case.

If hindsight is 20/20, wouldn't this serve to show that the thing in the uterus is actually a baby?

What is there to diagnose? See, you are approaching this backwards. You are stating that if there are "signs of life" outside the womb, that makes that individual case a baby. Rather than stating, a baby is showing signs of life. You are determining that it is a baby b/c of its ability to survive outside the womb. The functioning of a thing does not make it not the thing it is supposed to be. Either it is a non-functioning thing or it is a functioning thing. A computer is still a computer when it is broken- it is just a non-working computer. Same thing goes for a car, or a dead person or a dead cat. You still identify it by what it is, not by it's present condition. Adjectives are used to describe the noun, not to determine if the noun is actually the noun.

Do you refer to a baby as a fetus? Do you refer to a fetus as a man/woman? Do you refer to a tree as a piece of furniture?

 

[spittledip]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: spittledip

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: spittledip
Whether or not this is normal for the baby to survive is irrelevant. No one is calling it a fetus b/c it is most obviously a baby. Would you feel ok killing this baby?

Two points:

1. Hindsight is 20/20.

2. I'm not a doctor. And even if I were one, I'm wouldn't try to diagnose a patient based on video (see Bill Frist and Teri Schiavo). But I will say this: cases like these should be reviewed on a case by case basis. Obviously, the doctors saw promising signs that prompted to them undergo the neonatal care for the infant and fortunately it worked out in the end. But don't think that its always going to be the case.

If hindsight is 20/20, wouldn't this serve to show that the thing in the uterus is actually a baby?

What is there to diagnose? See, you are approaching this backwards. You are stating that if there are "signs of life" outside the womb, that makes that individual case a baby. Rather than stating, a baby is showing signs of life. You are determining that it is a baby b/c of its ability to survive outside the womb. The functioning of a thing does not make it not the thing it is supposed to be. Either it is a non-functioning thing or it is a functioning thing. A computer is still a computer when it is broken- it is just a non-working computer. Same thing goes for a car, or a dead person or a dead cat. You still identify it by what it is, not by it's present condition. Adjectives are used to describe the noun, not to determine if the noun is actually the noun.

Do you refer to a baby as a fetus? Do you refer to a fetus as a man/woman? Do you refer to a tree as a piece of furniture?

No, no and no. Apparently you refer to a baby as a fetus.

 

[ericlp]

Yawn... Everyone is going to die... some just a lot sooner then others. Welcome to planet earth, send flowers later... Get use to it and get over it. Obviously my posting about the reality isn't doing us any good so... Keep these pictures of the merical baby close by cause it's gonna be a long time (many more deaths) before another one happens.


Warm happy fuzzy feelings for every one! Pour you another drink? Double? Cheers!

 

[SuperFungus]

Originally posted by: blackllotus
It all depends on what you actually value about life. Some people value life itself, others, like me, see nothing valuable about life itself, but rather see value in consciousness. Consciousness is what gives us our thoughts, emotions, and everything else that we generally consider to be meaningful in life. Life without consciousness is meaningless therefore destroying life without a conscious is meaningless as well. I have no more qualms about killing insects then I do about putting paper through a paper shredder. I have no problem with abortions that occur before the fetus has a developed brain.

So when you're asleep your life is meaningless then. Well, thats reasonable enough. :disgust:

I hate this argument that the entirty of the human condition and human worth can be summed up in "consiousness". It simply can't.

This is just more evidence that the difference between a fetus and a baby doesn't really exist. Is human life valuable, and to be protected? Easy yes. Is underdeveloped human life (infant life) valuable? Another easy yes. Now exactly makes a fetus so different then? Size? Age? That the fetus relies on it's mother for life, like a patient relies on his surgeon?
None of these matter to me, a pregnant woman is only ever pregnant with human life (well so far), and ending the pregnancy outside of birth clearly ends this life. I don't think that there is any room for interpertation.