This has been coming for a while now, and has actually been put in practice in some hospitals, when babies are born with serious medical problems. I am not interested in getting into an argument about abortion but am I alone in thinking this might be taking it too far? This article refers to another article that was published in the Journal of Medical Ethics, a portion of which is quoted below: When legalized abortion on demand was proposed, there were those, myself included, who predicted that it would be a slippery slope, and I guess this has proven to be the case. Where will it end? If your child is not doing well in elementary school, will parents (or the state) one day be able to abort him or her?
I think abortion should be legal up to about age 30. By then we should know if they're worth keeping.
We can't always "score 100%" but we always need to try to stay on the path of honoring life. If we don't do that, then WHO decides which life is important and which one isn't? The government? We all know how great that works out. Not. The power of each person needs to STAY and reside with that individual person. I read that in NY in their state legislature, they're trying to get passed so that a woman can abort her baby even ONE DAY before the date of delivery. Man, that is just pure murder. No woman should have that much power over another. On the other hand, any woman who can carry a baby for 8 months and 29 days and then decide she doesn't want it anymore, would definitely make a lousy mother so either way the child needs to be taken away from the mother. Really, there should be little need for abortion these days. There are so many other options available. Since everyone has access to obamacare, they can go get sterilized if they don't want kids. If they change their mind later in life, the operations for both male and female are reversible. There are a lot more birth control options and they're quite inexpensive if a person digs around long enough to find something. As far as serious medical issues, although we may not be able to save each one, the compassionate way to go about things is to try, to value life and to continue to study and learn how to advance enough medically so that as much as possible can be done. We've come a LONG WAY in the past 100 years with regard to medical care and we can continue to advance.
This proposal is to allow a baby to be aborted AFTER the baby has been delivered, the only difference between an after-birth abortion and infanticide being one of semantics.
This is unbelievable! Why would a woman carry a child with a inkling of hope that it would be healthy yet prepare herself to KILL that baby if it is not?! How can a medical professional even think to introduce and push such a proposal as an alternative as a benefit for 'the family'? It would be murder of an innocent life born into this world! This sounds worst than people who ask someone to end their lives the only difference is they have had a chance to live it.!
It is a practice, at some hospitals, to leave a newborn baby who has been born with a deformity or serious illness unclothed on a cold table, without benefit of food or warmth, until the baby dies, then the death is recorded as failure to thrive. I know of one hospital in particular that stopped the practice only after it was made public by a nurse who refused to participate, but I know that it is done in other hospitals. What this paper is proposing is to codify the practice, so that they no longer even have to hide it. As we move further into a government managed healthcare system, we can expect to see more of this, I think, in the name of reducing costs to the public. Further, we'll see it on both ends of the life cycle. On the early end, more abortions and measures, such as this, to allow for the death of infants who are likely to put a strain on the costs of health care and, on the other end, we'll see medical opinions that call for fewer treatments for the elderly, who are no longer considered productive.
This seems completely horrifying to me! I'm sorry, even if the child is born with problems, you should at least give the child a chance. This isn't abortion, it's straight up murder. Some may argue abortion and murder are the same thing, and I won't get into that, but I think we can all agree this is pretty wrong.
The question I have is how many of these types of births does it take for the insurance companies, medical, to determine how it is going to affect the cost of health care. And then, what about the cost of life insurance, surely that would be affected as well?
I will admit to being pro choice but this is disgusting and unthinkable. How dare any hospital do such a horrible horrendous thing to a new born child. This isn't abortion its child cruelty and flat out murder. Now as I have said I am pro choice mainly because I know that the subject of abortion isn't as simple as some make it oiut to be. There can be factors such as the victim of a rape becoming pregnant by her attacker, or a woman discovering that she has a life threatening illnees and carrying the child could kill her. These are situations where I don't frown upon terminating the pregnancy, but what has been outlined here is something I not only frown upon but think ought to be stopped immediately. For me any pregnancy that goes beyond three months there can't be an abortion unless there are insinuating circumstances such as an accident that again puts the mothers life at risk so it comes down to her life or losing both of them. Other then that if the pregnancy is that far along the child has a righ to be born for me, a woman had plenty of time to decide whether to have the child or not by this point. As for this crap that if a child is born deformed or ill then kill it is beyond horrible. This isn't abortion its murdering a living human being, no hospital is going tell me otherwise, this medical personnel deserve to have charges filed against them.