What would you do, Babies with Anencephaly...

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: In any case I see no moral dilemma. The child is not viable and should be aborted.

I agree, it's not a moral dilemma and an abortion might be the right thing to do if continuing the pregnancy puts too much strain on the mother (both physically and emotional). But I also don't see anything wrong in the couple's decision to continue the pregnancy for the sole purpose of potentially helping others. I don't think it should matter in this instance if the motivation is purely for consolation or whether the wish to help others is in the foreground. The outcome to the ones who potentially profit from the donation will be the same.

If it were me in this situation. I would terminate as soon as possible.

Not only do I have my own life and health to consider (And pregnancy has proven to be quite harsh on my health - we are stopping at 2)

But I have my husband

My two daughters

My family

Ect ect ect to also consider.

Trisskar wrote: If it were me in this situation. I would terminate as soon as possible.

Not only do I have my own life and health to consider (And pregnancy has proven to be quite harsh on my health - we are stopping at 2)

But I have my husband

My two daughters

My family

Ect ect ect to also consider.

True, in my opinion, the pregnancy should only be continued if it's safe for the mother (both physically and psychologically)

The other day I saw an interview with a woman who adopts terminally ill children (of all ages) and cares for them in their last days of life. She said that it is sad to see an infant that you know will not last but a few days. But each life is special and each child deserves love and care all the way up to the end. I remember one statement she made almost word for word so I will attempt to quote her, “I know that I am caring for a life that will not be there long and will never be able to show gratitude or acknowledge the love given. I don’t do it because I expect something in return. I do it for the child.”

The host of the show was going to help her set up a 503c charity so that she could get funding to help her in her efforts.

But it touched me. And I remembered a part of the speech from Charlie Chaplin, “And the good earth is rich and can provide for everyone. The way of life can be free and beautiful, but we have lost the way. Greed has poisoned men’s souls, has barricaded the world with hate, has goose-stepped us into misery and bloodshed. We have developed speed, but we have shut ourselves in. Machinery that gives abundance has left us in want. Our knowledge has made us cynical. Our cleverness, hard and unkind. We think too much and feel too little. More than machinery we need humanity. More than cleverness we need kindness and gentleness. Without these qualities, life will be violent and all will be lost.”

In the article linked by Zenchi, the mother is quoted saying, “First, this was not a religious decision. Yes, we were and still are influenced by our beliefs but this goes beyond that. This is life. Everyone has it. Everyone deserves it.”

So many arguments are made concerning one thing or another. But when I read this I see a couple that understand the inherent value of all life. And even though we may consider or think of the situation as odd I feel I can make sense of their decision. If this was fifty years ago, they wouldn’t know there was a problem with the baby until much later or birth. So carrying it to term would not have been weird. And the decision to donate the organs to those that are in need could easily be construed as a coping measure. A means to have their infant’s life mean more than a failed pregnancy.

Interesting article Zenchi. Thank you for sharing it.

Cyan Sarden wrote:

Trisskar wrote: If it were me in this situation. I would terminate as soon as possible.

Not only do I have my own life and health to consider (And pregnancy has proven to be quite harsh on my health - we are stopping at 2)

But I have my husband

My two daughters

My family

Ect ect ect to also consider.

True, in my opinion, the pregnancy should only be continued if it's safe for the mother (both physically and psychologically)

Naturally its up to each individual Mother I am pro choice and feel a mother should absolutly choose to abort if they feel the need....

But when i was faced with that same choice (Second Daughter - we were sooo not ready) I fought to continue anyways.

One cannot really say until the time arrives and the force whispers.

Cyan Sarden wrote:

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: In any case I see no moral dilemma. The child is not viable and should be aborted.

I agree, it's not a moral dilemma and an abortion might be the right thing to do if continuing the pregnancy puts too much strain on the mother (both physically and emotional). But I also don't see anything wrong in the couple's decision to continue the pregnancy for the sole purpose of potentially helping others. I don't think it should matter in this instance if the motivation is purely for consolation or whether the wish to help others is in the foreground. The outcome to the ones who potentially profit from the donation will be the same.

I completely disagree for some of the very reasons you mention. It would be to emotionally hard on the mother. Its not worth it to have her go through that. Even if she is willing, abortion should be recommended. To try and benefit from the tragedy of others (mother and child) is the height of self service.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: I completely disagree for some of the very reasons you mention. It would be to emotionally hard on the mother. Its not worth it to have her go through that. Even if she is willing, abortion should be recommended. To try and benefit from the tragedy of others (mother and child) is the height of self service.

Who are you to assume that something would be too emotionally hard on someone else? If it would be so for you, that's fine, but are you in a position to make that call for others?

Leah Starspectre wrote:

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: I completely disagree for some of the very reasons you mention. It would be to emotionally hard on the mother. Its not worth it to have her go through that. Even if she is willing, abortion should be recommended. To try and benefit from the tragedy of others (mother and child) is the height of self service.

Who are you to assume that something would be too emotionally hard on someone else? If it would be so for you, that's fine, but are you in a position to make that call for others?

I did not say I was in a position to make that call for others. Of course its the ultimate decision of the mother in the end. What I did say was that in the course of the discussions over the situation it would be emotional manipulation to recommend anything other than to abort.

Shoulda, coulda, woulda. :laugh:

It's personal choice. An it's the person choosing that has to accept the consequence.

Leah Starspectre wrote:

Kohadre wrote: The choice to carry a corpse to term, only for the purpose of chopping it up and shipping it's parts out still remains a very morbid choice to me. How is that any different from scientists and black market dealers who wish to grow human fetuses in test tubes, for the sole purpose of hacking them apart and then selling off their organs?

The couple in question were given a choice: abort, and live with the pain of a lost child, or complete the pregnancy and mitigate the pain of loss by helping others live? I don't see how that is morbid. Is it any more morbid than keeping a brain-dead adult on life support for the purpose of organ donation?

I'm sorry, you're right. It's not dark or morbid at all. It's an absolutely joyous occurrence and should be celebrated.

Try and think outside of your preconceived notions of right and wrong for a minute, and look at what is actually happening in this scenario.

The child in question is already dead, and is being incubated for it's organs which will be dived out upon it's delivery. I don't see how that fact which is stated in the article can be debated or argued for anything other than what it is.

And yes, it's just as morbid (I'm sorry, joyous) as keeping a brain dead adult on life support for the purpose of harvesting their organs.

Yes, people will benefit from the organs which will be harvested from the child. Just because people will benefit doesn't make the act any less dark or morbid (sorry, I meant celebratory).