The Daily Kfnork points to an article about moves in Holland to legalize killing babies that cannot survive on their own. As most of my readers know, I'm just about as against abortion and such as it's possible to be, but I'm not as outraged by this practice as DeoDuce. Why? The answer is near the end of the article itself:
However, experts acknowledge that doctors euthanize routinely in the United States but that such practice is hidden."Measures that might marginally extend a child's life by minutes or hours or days or weeks are stopped. This happens routinely, namely, every day," said Lance Stell, professor of medical ethics at Davidson College and staff ethicist at Carolinas Medical Center in the United States. "Everybody knows that it happens, but there's a lot of hypocrisy. Instead, people talk about things they're not going to do."
Even before hospitals and doctors existed, one of the most fundamental and difficult duties of a midwife was to kill babies that could not survive on their own. After birth the mother was in too much shock to know what was going on -- and the fathers were kept out of the birthing rooms partly for just this reason -- and if the baby was severely deformed or injured the midwife would kill him or her and tell the parents that the child died while being born. That's how it's been for thousands of years. Mercy killings are, in my opinion, far different than abortions or killings done for the sake of convenience.
Under what circumstances are these killings performed?
Examples include extremely premature births, where children suffer brain damage from bleeding and convulsions; and diseases where a child could only survive on life support for the rest of its life such as spina bifida and epidermosis bullosa, a blistering illness.
Some of these, like spina bifida, are not fatal and can be treated (even with in utero surgery). Epidermolysis bullosa is eventually fatal, but people born with it can live into their 30s...
Imagine......a child with painful wounds similar to burns covering most of his or her body.
...having to wrap each tiny little infant finger with Vaseline gauze and then cover it with gauze to prevent the hand from webbing and contracting.
...never being able to hold your child tight because if you did, their skin would blister or shear off.
...a child who will never know what it’s like to run, skip or jump, or to play games with other children because even the slightest physical contact will injure his or her skin.
...a child who screams out each time it is bathed because the water touching its open wounds creates incredible pain.
...a diet of only liquids or soft foods because blistering and scarring occur in the esophagus.
...an active baby with his knees soaked in blood from the normal act of crawling.
...a teenager with stumps for hands, the affected fingers long gone.This is the nightmare of life with Epidermolysis Bullosa (EB)
In other cases, babies simply can't survive without life support, and even with it they won't live very long. So do we have a moral duty to spend thousands of dollars to extend the life of a doomed baby from one month to three months? Thousands of dollars that could be spent treating other patients with curable maladies? I don't know. Is it worth the health risk for a mother to carry and deliver such a baby even when his or her condition is known far in advance?
Even thinking about the problem makes me ill, and I pray that I'm never faced with such a decision. However, as with battlefield mercy killings and adult euthansia, I don't think the solution is as simple as "never under any circumstances".
Update:
It's been pointed out to me, from another article, that the final decision wouldn't fall to the parents but to the doctors, which I think is ridiculous. It's one thing to allow the next-of-kin to make life decisions based on what's best for their loved one, but it's another to allow a council of government doctors to make decisions based on what's best for the socialist health care system.
Bottom Line: It's playing with too much power. Taking away life is a dangerous ability and should be used with the utmost discretion. This then brings into play the debate on the death penalty, abortion, etc. Euthanasia of innocents is wrong and unjustifiable.
But you're right, it's a morally nebulous issue. You did a fine job of deconstructing the article.
Kudos!
File this one under "decisions I hope I never have to make". As an absolute, I think killing babies is wrong, but in the context of this article, I can certainly see how it might be the more rational and in acertain way, merciful, decision. But it would be one that if I'd made, I'd forsee dark nights of soul-searching and epending on the mercies of a gracious God.
It's a decision that I've made, and it will haunt me for the rest of my life. My wife was carrying fraternal twins, and the male twin wasn't growing. I had to choose if we would attempt to save my son' life, at the risk of damaging my wife's and daughter's health, or if we would let him die.
I chose to let him die, and I am still horrified at myself when I wake in the middle of the night. I can't imagine having to make that decision ever again, and what I did wasn't euthanizia, either.
MB: Thanks for sharing that with us, it must have been a very difficult decision.
I have RDEB (Epidermolysis Bullosa) and I am 22 years old. I have no intention of leaving this world in 10 years time and I don't think many people with EB are! I have known people as bad as me, sometimes worse who have lived into their sixties and have had a great life!
I have a great life. Yes I am in pain but I have lived wih it since birth, I don't make it my whole life! My whole life is having fun, training to be a primary school teacher, seeing my favourite person in the world sing live to me (thats Will Young by the way) and seeing him in plays and visiting my friends in London, shopping till my bank balance cant take it and partying with my friends until the break of day! Yes I have to be in a wheelchair sometimes and I have crap days where I just wish I had never had this god awful condition but you know what? My life rocks! Why should babies miss out on leading a life like that! Its wholly unfair and I can't comment on any other condition but I can on RDEB and I certainly don't agree!
Mr Williams,
I live with Recessive (Hallopeau Siemens) Dystrophic Epidermolysis Bullosa every day of my life. But I'm grateful that I'm here to live that life. Yes, it is painful. Yes it is traumatic. But life is a wonderful thing, and there is so much to appreciate. You are commenting on a subject of which you have no knowledge. Do I wish I didn't have EB? Yes, of course. Do I wish I had never been born, or been murdered at birth? Of course I do not. Alcoholics, drug addicts, depressives, children with ADHD and Autism all suffer and disable their families. Would you suggest they be killed? Have you forgotten all the brave men and women who gave their lives to prevent our living in a society where such action could be taken? This is fascism masquerading as good intentions. Life is eventually fatal, Mr Williams, any many people with severe EB live much past the age of thirty. Why not meet a person with severe EB, or attend an EB conference before making such sweeping statements?
Amy and Melissa: My apologies. You're right in thinking that I don't know much about RDEB. I'm not a doctor, nor do I know anyone suffering from the disease. I didn't mean to imply that any particular disease meant that a "mercy killing" was required or anything like that, and I'm sorry that I happened to choose yours as an example, but that's what was mentioned in the article.
It's sad that anyone has to make such life and death decisions, and often there's no easy answer. You're right in saying that everyone dies at some point, but even still, there's a difference between spending a million dollars to extend a life by one month or one year or one decade, especially if debilitating pain is involved. I'm not wise enough to know the right answer for every circumstance, and I certainly didn't mean to cause offense.
Mr Williams,
apologies accepted. However, I believe that all babies have a right to life, even if that does mean spending a million dollars. I can assure you that it would not cost that much to keep a child with EB alive. People who have organ transplants often only live for a decade or so more, yet this transplants are (rightly) lauded as one of the greatest advancements in medical history. I speak for myself and many other with EB when I say that I would rather live in pain than not live at all. I' outraged that anyone could be arrogant enough to believe that they could make that decision for me, whether they are a doctor or not. Every child should be given a chance. When I was born, the doctors didn't expect me to live past 6 months, but I was given the chance to prove them wrong! Don't all children deserve the chance to do the same?
Please excuse the typing errors in that last message - I have a puppy howling for attention!
I have nothing to add to Mel's comment apart from the money issue. Why is it an issue and problem that we spend millions on giving someone a better life or even a life at all, yet we don't question the money being spent on murderers, rapists, abusers etc who are in prison having money spent on them for training, rehab, living, food etc.