A Socialized Medicine Death Sentence

[ScreamingEagle]

Life vs death. Who are we to kill children that we feel are too defective to live on our earth? Good thing the above child was not born in today's society....

Without the advanced medical technology that has been breathing for this child, feeding this child, the child would have died long ago. We should THINK before hooking people up to machines like this, if it is a no-hope situation. Would you want to live on like that? Why do you wish it on anyone else? Of course I understand supporting life if there is hope of recovery. Otherwise, why?

Supporting hope is what pushes the boundaries of medicine....that is why the U.S. had a potential remedy and Britain with its socialized medicine did not.....

 

[The Irish Ram]

That's deceptive....

This is a really tragic story, especially for the parents, but it's being manipulated. The child is on life support, and severely braindamaged from the genetic disease. The parents are reaching out for anything that might help, understandably but what they've found is a treatment that works for another genetic disease, whom experts unanimously agree won't help with this one and nothing will reverse the the brain organ destruction that has already occurred to the point where the child has to be on life support.

So, what is to prevent the panel from voting for death regarding Downs Syndrome births, deformities, blindness?
Because that is where this is headed... Parents should be making decisions for their children, not death panels.

No, it's not where it is headed. My Mom had to make the decision to "pull the plug" when my stepfather was on irreversible life support. It happens all the time. How many families do have to make that decision. When your body can't breathe on its own and your brain no longer functions, why do you want to keep that person alive?
Kids with Downs Syndrome, deformities or blindness don't require life support. Think about what you're saying.

Your mother made the decision, as it should be. Strangers didn't make it for her. Maybe the decision was the right one, maybe it was not, but it was her decision to make, and no one else's. I am not approving or disapproving of pulling the plug. My concern is who is making the decision.
Children with special needs usually require a lifetime of care. Depending on the type of abnormality, the child may well need life support.

 

[Doc1]

Typical LWNJ response. Deflect, redirect, misunderstand, change the subject. You can't teach a closed mind Doc.

Oh depending Medicaid, and the GOP wants rid of it. You RWNJ's only care about the fetus in the womb. Don't pretend you are pro life you are just anti Title X and Medicaid.

Sweetie, YOU are one of the biggest nut jobs on this board. You are a liar to boot.

What did I lie about? What is the GOP plan? Can't wait to hear this. I reserve being called sweetie by my husband.

About there not being a cap on Medicare.

I don't believe there was ever a cap on Medicare, and no individual cap on Medicaid. The ACA affected Medicaid and allowed more people on it, except in some GOP run states, like 18 or 19. Those same states one must have a child and live as a family to qualify and dirt poor, or disabled.

What you believe is immaterial. Hospital Stays, 90 days are covered, you then have 60 reserve days. Once those reserve days are used you are on your own as far as the Hospital goes for the rest of your life.

 

[OldLady]

Some lives aren't meant to be lived. We really need to change societal attitudes about death; I have sympathy for the parents but they need to let their poor baby go. He'd be a vegetable sitting in his own crap if he survived - that's a terrible fate to wish on anyone.

I can't imagine having to make the decision to pull the plug on a baby. It's hard enough when it is an adult family member. We can't be rational about our babies. I feel terrible for these parents, but this decision is about them, not their baby. They can't let the child go. The courts had to intervene on behalf of the child.

 

[OldLady]

That's deceptive....

This is a really tragic story, especially for the parents, but it's being manipulated. The child is on life support, and severely braindamaged from the genetic disease. The parents are reaching out for anything that might help, understandably but what they've found is a treatment that works for another genetic disease, whom experts unanimously agree won't help with this one and nothing will reverse the the brain organ destruction that has already occurred to the point where the child has to be on life support.

So, what is to prevent the panel from voting for death regarding Downs Syndrome births, deformities, blindness?
Because that is where this is headed... Parents should be making decisions for their children, not death panels.

No, it's not where it is headed. My Mom had to make the decision to "pull the plug" when my stepfather was on irreversible life support. It happens all the time. How many families do have to make that decision. When your body can't breathe on its own and your brain no longer functions, why do you want to keep that person alive?
Kids with Downs Syndrome, deformities or blindness don't require life support. Think about what you're saying.

Your mother made the decision, as it should be. Strangers didn't make it for her. Maybe the decision was the right one, maybe it was not, but it was her decision to make, and no one else's. I am not approving or disapproving of pulling the plug. My concern is who is making the decision.
Children with special needs usually require a lifetime of care. Depending on the type of abnormality, the child may well need life support.

You support that? Dooming a child to a life as a vegetable? Why? "Abnormalities" are one thing. If you can't breathe or swallow or know you're alive, I don't see the point. The post I just put up explains why I think the court was right to intervene here.

 

[The Irish Ram]

I didn't say I agreed with the parents, I said it was their decision.

 

[BoSoxGal]

I didn't say I agreed with the parents, I said it was their decision.

Except no, it's not. The decision has been made by the judicial system. The same kind of judicial review is available here in the US, and while not utilized often, hospitals have gone to court to seek review of treatment decisions made by parents or other guardians that were contrary to the medical best interests of the patient. Similarly, most states provide a judicial bypass process for minor females to seek pregnancy termination in the absence of parental consent. There is still a long way to go in this area of the law, but there is a general recognition that children aren't property subject to the whims of their parents.

I feel sympathy for these parents, but that sympathy is overriden by my frustration with their inability to put their child's best interest ahead of their own selfish emotions.

When I did estate planning this is why I counseled clients regarding the importance of a living will, and in the state where I practiced these wills could be registered with the state and that was something I recommended to all my clients - because some people have very peculiar and/or selfish notions about end of life decisions and will keep their terminally ill loved ones alive in torment or complete lack of dignity just because of their own emotional baggage. That's seriously fucked up.

When it's an infant powerless to make a living will, the courts are the last resort to preserve human dignity and I'm glad that court has stepped in on this poor infant's behalf. I also agree with the far more humane approach of the medical establishment in the U.K. - they don't try absolutely anything in the way of treatment when the overwhelming odds are against any kind of meaningful improvement. That's like making the baby into a lab rat for medical research - and I'm sorry, but the doctors here who want to treat this baby don't care about what kind of quality of life he will have severely brain damaged, blind and deaf and paralyzed - they only care about their research and having a human lab rat to conduct it on.