Dutch to set guidelines for euthanasia of babies

[Abbey Normal]

I happen to believe that partial-birth abortions are despicable, but I also believe that abortion and euthanasia are two separate things with two distinct sets of uses and motives.

I agree that they can have distinct reasons, but the reasons can also overlap.

 

[Annie]

Medical ethics would be a good start, instead of personal beliefs and feelings.
But, I know that’s not possible….so, you guys rave on about abortion instead of addressing the starter post directly.

AND you refuse to acknowledge the connections...

 

[MissileMan]

I agree that they can have distinct reasons, but the reasons can also overlap.

How so?

 

[Gunny]

And for children, the decisions of life and death are the responsibility of the parents. That's the way it works, unless you want to give up your parental rights to a government.

The decisions of life and death for children is God's not mine, nor the government's.

 

[MissileMan]

The decisions of life and death for children is God's not mine, nor the government's.

Well, shit!

Why take them to a doctor at all then?

 

[Annie]

Well, shit!

Why take them to a doctor at all then?

Whether they are healthy as can be, inbetween life and death, that is the responsibility of parents and doctors.

 

[Gunny]

Medical ethics would be a good start, instead of personal beliefs and feelings.
But, I know that’s not possible….so, you guys rave on about abortion instead of addressing the starter post directly.

Who's raving? I'm having a nice Sunday morning argument.

I am not addressing abortion itself other than to show the progression of the slippery slope that allegedly doesn't exist. While the responses may not be what you wish, the starter post leads directly to the slippery slope argument. Addressing only euthenizing terminally-ill children takes a single event out of context of the big picture.

 

[Gunny]

Well, shit!

Why take them to a doctor at all then?

To provide for them the best possible care, not execute them.

 

[MissileMan]

To provide for them the best possible care, not execute them.

And IMHO, the best possible care is in some cases, going to be an early end to a terminal disease.

 

[Mr. P]

AND you refuse to acknowledge the connections...

There is no connection...its two different areas of medicine.
Don’t open the "connection" can of worms, ever hear of a DNR order?
We could go there too, but there is no point.

 

[Annie]

There is no connection...its two different areas of medicine.
Don’t open the "connection" can of worms, ever hear of a DNR order?
We could go there too, but there is no point.

There are connections, you just refuse to acknowledge them. You are also correct on your last point and that also caused a lot of problems way back when...There is a whole lot of difference between 'no extraordinary means' and withholding nourishment and hydration.

 

[Mr. P]

Whether they are healthy as can be, inbetween life and death, that is the responsibility of parents and doctors.

EXACTLY!!! So let them have options...That all I want to see.

 

[Gunny]

There is no connection...its two different areas of medicine.
Don’t open the "connection" can of worms, ever hear of a DNR order?
We could go there too, but there is no point.

How can there be no connection> In both instances (abortion/euthenizing children) you start out with a live baby and end up with a dead one.

A DNR order is not the same thing as intentionally taking a life. It is not using artificial means to keep alive someone who would otherwise be dead.

 

[Mr. P]

There are connections, you just refuse to acknowledge them. You are also correct on your last point and that also caused a lot of problems way back when...There is a whole lot of difference between 'no extraordinary means' and withholding nourishment and hydration.

I see connections made that are invalid..I do understand them, but they are still invalid.

 

[Gunny]

I see connections made that are invalid..I do understand them, but they are still invalid.

How are they invalid?

 

[Mr. P]

How can there be no connection> In both instances (abortion/euthenizing children) you start out with a live baby and end up with a dead one.

A DNR order is not the same thing as intentionally taking a life. It is not using artificial means to keep alive someone who would otherwise be dead.

No it's not, but it is withholding means that would continue life.

So, you folks talk about a slippery slope...Think about it..And as I've said before
butt out of other peoples business..As K said,

Whether they are healthy as can be, inbetween life and death, that is the responsibility of parents and doctors.

 

[Gunny]

No it's not, but it is withholding means that would continue life.

So, you folks talk about a slippery slope...Think about it..And as I've said before
butt out of other peoples business..As K said,

I see you are taking this far more seriously than you probably should. Who is butting into other peoples' business? At least on my part, I am expressing my opinion on the topic.

If left up to me, you lose. But we don't normally enact laws by passing them through my house.

And to use your line of reasoning ..... since when is it not the business of ALL of us when the innocent who cannot speak for themselves are left to the mercy of people whose judgement we consider to be wrong?

 

[Annie]

I see connections made that are invalid..I do understand them, but they are still invalid.

And YOUR POSITION is invalid IMO. So there we have it.

 

[Annie]

No it's not, but it is withholding means that would continue life.

So, you folks talk about a slippery slope...Think about it..And as I've said before
butt out of other peoples business..As K said,

You, Mr. P. are misrepresenting what you are quoting me as saying, as far as doctors and parents. They are to keep a child born, as healthy as possible, which for most means very. If there is something wrong with the child, as comfortable and loving as they can be. That doesn't mean they can kill the child, which is what you are arguing should be a choice option.

 

[Mr. P]

You, Mr. P. are misrepresenting what you are quoting me as saying, as far as doctors and parents. They are to keep a child born, as healthy as possible, which for most means very. If there is something wrong with the child, as comfortable and loving as they can be. That doesn't mean they can kill the child, which is what you are arguing should be a choice option.

Yeah, you’re right…let em die in agony not matter how long it takes.