Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Clinicaly dead pregnant woman on life support

Options
12357…44

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Dimitri Many Backside wrote: »
    It's a baby as far as I'm concerned.

    A lot of people would say its a baby from the moment of conception. Maybe we should have mandatory pregnancy testing of all females in our hospitals so that any pregnant women can be kept on life support in order to bring the baby to term.

    While all this money and time is being spent on a child that may not even survive there are living people out there dying because they can't get the medical treatment they need. Some seem to have more of a right to life than others.


  • Options
    #123
    niamh.foley
    Registered Users Posts: 278 ✭✭niamh.foley


    lazygal wrote: »
    Which baby? There's a 16 weeks old foetus, not a baby. The ease with which its ok to use women as incubators regardless of their wishes is shameful.
    I say that as someone who told my husband that I would want to be kept 'alive' should the need arise when I was pregnant. If he didn't want to do that, he should have the right to decide to let me die.


    THe women is in the Second Term. Its classed as a baby once it has a heart beat at 7weeks. from 1 - 6 weeks its classed as a foetus.

    why end 2 lifes ? there is a chance a life could live on from this story


  • Options
    #124
    tritium
    Registered Users Posts: 7,441 ✭✭✭tritium


    lazygal wrote: »
    We protect the dead in all sorts of ways. You're not allowed to harvest organs, without consent of next of kin, for example. And defiling a corpse is a crime too. Living wills are not legal in Ireland, and the wishes of a dead person can be overridden by the decisions of next of kin.


    None of which changes the key point that as a corpse she really doesn't have the capacity to make a choice anymore and so the ghouls of the extremes of the pro life and pro choice side should just leave well enough alone. Right now the protection her corpse needs of from being used as an easy piece of PR. By all means have a reasoned debate on the sidelines about the rights of next of kin, fathers, medical ethics etc but let's not pretend this is something it isn't.

    If ever there was a worse example to use of oppressive Ireland.


  • Options
    #125
    tritium
    Registered Users Posts: 7,441 ✭✭✭tritium


    lazygal wrote: »
    Which baby? There's a 16 weeks old foetus, not a baby. The ease with which its ok to use women as incubators regardless of their wishes is shameful.
    I say that as someone who told my husband that I would want to be kept 'alive' should the need arise when I was pregnant. If he didn't want to do that, he should have the right to decide to let me die.

    And I'll counter with which woman? There's a corpse not a woman. It was a woman once, right now its a dead body.


  • Options
    #126
    hardCopy
    Registered Users Posts: 5,969 ✭✭✭hardCopy


    lazygal wrote: »
    Which baby? There's a 16 weeks old foetus, not a baby. The ease with which its ok to use women as incubators regardless of their wishes is shameful.
    I say that as someone who told my husband that I would want to be kept 'alive' should the need arise when I was pregnant. If he didn't want to do that, he should have the right to decide to let me die.

    She is dead already. I don't see this as a debate on choice or lack of choice, in this case the mother's quality of life and future prospects are not being impinged on. For me, the wellbeing of the remaining family come behind those of the baby.

    If there is a chance at saving a healthy blob/foetus/baby and the only real human cost is a delayed burial then I think the chance should be taken.

    I would say that this should only be done if it's likely to work and the baby is likely to be healthy. I would hope it's not being done a on a punt because there's a small chance of success. The thought of the family and baby being put through this for months out of fear of the legal repercussions is unsettling. These decisions should be made by doctors, not lawyers.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    jackboy
    Registered Users Posts: 4,573 ✭✭✭jackboy


    If a healthy baby is born then the family and most of society will decide that the right thing was done. If the baby dies or is born very sick then the concensus will be that a monstrous thing was done keeping the woman alive. I think most people's opinion on this issue is very flaky.


  • Options
    #128
    kylith
    Registered Users Posts: 17,736 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    tritium wrote: »
    I'm not sure they're the only people affected by the situation. The baby would have to have a father to, fair chance he's affected even if our messed up laws don't actually take any account of him.

    Fair enough, but I haven't seen him mentioned so I don't know is he not on the scene, does he even know about the pregnancy, does he want anything to do with any baby which may or may not come to be, or is he even known. I agree with you that our laws need to take more account of unmarried fathers. Anyway - the decision to continue or terminate the pregnancy should be in the hands of those who would be responsible for raising any resulting child, not in the hands of those guessing what a dead woman or a foetus might want.


  • Options
    #129
    mikom
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,391 ✭✭✭✭mikom


    Chances of the child surviving............ very slim.
    Chances of if the child survives that it is born with a severe disability ........... very high.

    Who has come forward and stated that they wish to take on the care of this child?


  • Options
    #130
    dark crystal
    Registered Users Posts: 10,962 ✭✭✭✭dark crystal


    What a tragic story.

    I'd be more interested to know the father's wishes on the matter, rather than the grandparents. If there is a father in the picture, of course. It would be awful to deny him the chance to raise this child if he wishes to do so.


  • Options
    #131
    TheGoldenAges
    Registered Users Posts: 1,163 ✭✭✭TheGoldenAges


    My view:



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    Caliden
    Registered Users Posts: 5,982 ✭✭✭Caliden


    This is disgusting. They're growing a baby inside a corpse.

    The poor woman's parents must be absolutely horrified and I can't imagine what this woman looks like with all the machines attached to her to keep her alive.


  • Options
    #133
    Grayson
    Registered Users Posts: 16,204 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    Dimitri Many Backside wrote: »
    The ease at which a number of posters would kill a baby is disgusting and shameful. Not even giving it a second though or giving the child a chance at life.

    This is also a lesson for people who laugh at the idea of marriage. You could be the father of that child and have zero say in what happens.

    Not a baby. There's not a single person here who would kill a baby.


  • Options
    #134
    Grayson
    Registered Users Posts: 16,204 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    niamh.foley wrote: »
    THe women is in the Second Term. Its classed as a baby once it has a heart beat at 7weeks. from 1 - 6 weeks its classed as a foetus.

    why end 2 lifes ? there is a chance a life could live on from this story

    This is all wrong. from 1-9 weeks it's defined an as embryo. It's a foetus after that.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetus


  • Options
    #135
    dark crystal
    Registered Users Posts: 10,962 ✭✭✭✭dark crystal


    mikom wrote: »
    Chances of the child surviving............ very slim.
    Chances of if the child survives that it is born with a severe disability ........... very high.
    Tubaiste wrote: »

    The baby can't be healthy even if he/she survives. The woman is dead, let her rest in peace.

    Has this been confirmed by the doctors? I didn't read that in the posted article.


  • Options
    #136
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    actually a brood mare for the state.


  • Options
    #137
    conorhal
    Registered Users Posts: 6,995 ✭✭✭conorhal


    bodice ripper wrote: »
    actually a brood mare for the state.

    ....And the proborts champing at the bit for a state exectioner to be appointed for unborn children.


  • Options
    #138
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    conorhal wrote: »
    ....And the proborts champing at the bit for a state exectioner to be appointed for unborn children.


    funny, I didn't say anything about abortion. you did though.


  • Options
    #139
    conorhal
    Registered Users Posts: 6,995 ✭✭✭conorhal


    bodice ripper wrote: »
    funny, I didn't say anything about abortion. you did though.

    It's generally how I'd catagorize the deliberate killing of a healthy unborn foetus.


  • Options
    #140
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    conorhal wrote: »
    It's generally how I'd catagorize the deliberate killing of a healthy unborn foetus.


    Thats your problem.


  • Options
    #141
    mikom
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,391 ✭✭✭✭mikom


    conorhal wrote: »
    ....And the proborts champing at the bit for a state exectioner to be appointed for unborn children.

    Proborts, allies of the Decepticons in the new Michael Bay movie.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    conorhal wrote: »
    ....And the proborts champing at the bit for a state exectioner to be appointed for unborn children.
    MOD: It's an emotive enough subject without you posting baiting comments like that. Give it a rest.


  • Options
    #143
    conorhal
    Registered Users Posts: 6,995 ✭✭✭conorhal


    bodice ripper wrote: »
    Thats your problem.

    I'd say it was a pretty big problem for the baby too.


  • Options
    #144
    conorhal
    Registered Users Posts: 6,995 ✭✭✭conorhal


    humanji wrote: »
    MOD: It's an emotive enough subject without you posting baiting comments like that. Give it a rest.

    Fair enough, but there's no shortge of emotive posting from the other side of the argument either that has free reign. But I'm out.


  • Options
    #145
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    conorhal wrote: »
    I'd say it was a pretty big problem for the baby too.


    right so, give conor the baby. hope its healthy.


  • Options
    #146
    mikom
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,391 ✭✭✭✭mikom


    bodice ripper wrote: »
    actually a brood mare for the state.
    conorhal wrote: »
    ....proborts champing at the bit
    conorhal wrote: »
    no shortge of emotive posting from the other side of the argument either that has free reign.

    Is this a baby or a foal we are talking about?


  • Options
    #147
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    mikom wrote: »
    Is this a baby or a foal we are talking about?


    well, neither actually.


  • Options
    #148
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    niamh.foley wrote: »
    THe women is in the Second Term. Its classed as a baby once it has a heart beat at 7weeks.
    Yeah, that's incorrect on so many levels.

    Even legally there is not yet a "person" inside this woman. If the pregnancy were to end this week, it would not be issued with any kind of certificate, it would be classed as a miscarriage and there would be one casket and one funeral, for the woman who is already dead.

    The issue here is not that of abortion at all, it's the state overriding the right to bodily autonomy. If this was an actual baby on life support, they would have the option to pull the plug. But for a legal mess we've gotten ourselves into, they are being denied their right to let their loved one go.


  • Options
    #149
    irishfeen
    Registered Users Posts: 8,061 ✭✭✭irishfeen


    I actually think we should be damn proud as a country if this child is born healthy - I would be ashamed of this country if they let that child die when we have the medical expertise to give it a chance in life. The child never did anything to anyone and from what I gather the mother had every intention of giving birth. This is not part of the abortion debate at all IMO.


  • Options
    #150
    dark crystal
    Registered Users Posts: 10,962 ✭✭✭✭dark crystal


    seamus wrote: »
    Yeah, that's incorrect on so many levels.

    Even legally there is not yet a "person" inside this woman. If the pregnancy were to end this week, it would not be issued with any kind of certificate, it would be classed as a miscarriage and there would be one casket and one funeral, for the woman who is already dead.

    The issue here is not that of abortion at all, it's the state overriding the right to bodily autonomy. If this was an actual baby on life support, they would have the option to pull the plug. But for a legal mess we've gotten ourselves into, they are being denied their right to let their loved one go.

    I understand your point, but what about the wishes of the mother and father to have this child? I still haven't heard anything about the father, only the grandparents.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    ZiabR
    Registered Users Posts: 5,575 ✭✭✭ZiabR


    eviltwin wrote: »
    A lot of people would say its a baby from the moment of conception. Maybe we should have mandatory pregnancy testing of all females in our hospitals so that any pregnant women can be kept on life support in order to bring the baby to term.

    While all this money and time is being spent on a child that may not even survive there are living people out there dying because they can't get the medical treatment they need. Some seem to have more of a right to life than others.

    You make a good point alright. Either way it is a very difficult decision for the parents of the mother. It also raises the question "why have a next of kin" if their wishes are not going to be fulfilled anyway?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement