Would You Kill Your Very Sick Newborn?
AdventureDad | November 6There is currently an intense discussion going on in United Kingdom regarding the policy of “severely damaged” infants with a bleak future. To call this a heated discussion might be understatement of the decade, people obviously have very passionate feelings on this subject. Some want to debate the question of possibly killing very sick infants who will require extensive life-long care and not live a decent life. The life-long care discussed would most likely be relatively short. The people who want this debate are not stupid, crazy, or uneducated. It’s The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists who say:
“We would like the working party to think more radically about non-resuscitation, withdrawal of treatment decisions… and active euthanasia, as they are ways of widening the management options available to the sickest of newborns.”
Which is a polite way of saying we need to discuss if it might be more humane, or practical, to kill some newborns instead of having them live a short painful life. I’m the fortunate father of two young children and I find the thought of this very emotional. If my newborn child was very sick, would I consider putting her to sleep in order to lessen her pain and suffering? I can’t say for sure but it seems very unlikely that I could every go through with something like that.
The problem with this discussion is that people get very emotional and passionate which makes a logical discussion almost impossible. The problem for me would be to know for sure that my child only had a couple of months to live. I know science is great, but mistakes happen. I can certainly see the other point of view as well. If I love my very sick child so much, and know she will only live a couple of months, shouldn’t I shorten her life to stop the suffering?
It’s a very complex issue with an incredible amount of personal factors deciding our views. Organizations representing the handicapped are naturally upset people are even considering having this discussion.
Simone Aspis, of the British Council of Disabled People, said: “We really do not know how long babies and young people will live for.
“We should not deny people the opportunity to live for as long as they are able to.”
I don’t mind having this debate but I think heading down the road of possibly killing babies is dangerous. Who will decide what to do and where will we draw the line? Is there a chance a program like this might spiral out of control and cause bad decisions? We are after all talking about the most precious thing of all, the life of a child. It seems to cruel to decide if a child gets to live or not. And what if we’re wrong? Even if it’s just once?
At the same time my mother was pregnant with me, my grandmother (at the time in her forties) became pregnant with my aunt. At her birth, she was mongoloid, mentally retarded, and had a hole between two of the chambers of her heart. She was not expected to live past the age of five, and at a time where institutionalization of the retarded was still a very real option for most families.
She and my grandparents endured surgeries to repair her heart. Her fifth birthday came and went, and she survived. Some in the family believe that what kept my grandfather alive into his seventies was the fact that he felt the need to stay on as long as his heart would allow.
She attended a local school for mentally retarded children. She completed school at age 21 and worked in a workshop designed for adults of her skills and abilities. Eventually, her program was able to place her with Pavion, the cosmetics manufacturer. There she attended company picnics, received many of the gifts and perks that other employees receive, and was a welcome member of the family.
When Pavion closed up manufacturing locally, she moved over to Lederle Laboratories, which has since become American Home Products. They manufacture pharmaceuticals. Her division, which employs many individuals of similar ability, has a supervisor who treats her like a person. He is a firm supervisor who is attentive both to her ability and attention level. She is challenged each day. AHP employs these workers to package introductory kits for your physician, so when they get a promotional box with pens, pads, and samples of the newest meds, there is a good chance my aunt had a hand in putting it together.
She lives in a group home with 13 other individuals. They receive round the clock supervision. She takes her medications and manages much of her own schedule. She exercises each and every day (do you? I don’t!) and helps in the kitchen when it’s her turn. She takes vacations with her house mates, meets pro baseball players, and tomorrow she is taking my family and I to a musical on Broadway.
She is 41 years old, 6 months my senior, and we worry these days whether I will live long enough to continue to look out for her, as she is the youngest of her siblings.
To her, life is productive, meaningful, and worthy of living. How can educated medical professionals even think that ‘active euthanasia’ of infants is worthy of discussion? My local paper featured an article on a pediatric practice that is adding an adult care specialist to their practice because victims of what we call ‘childhood diseases’ such as Cystic Fibrosis are living long past their expected lifespans.
Being a guardian is hard. I know I don’t visit enough, and I’m sure she is lonely at times because her family cannot attend to her needs as well as the experts who care for her. But her home is beautiful and not sterile, and I would guess that if you asked her and she understood the implications, she would not have chosen ‘active euthanasia’.
She is not suffering. She is living. I am not against euthanasia, but it is for those who are no longer living but their body hangs on. There are an extraordinary number of ways to live. It’s not like it was 50 years ago. The iron lung and Willowbrook are not the options available anymore. Who will be the next Stephen Hawking? The next Michael J. Fox? The next Marlee Matlin?
Every person who comes to this world changes it in ways that we can never know. Even if my aunt had lived the 5 years she was promised, she would have changed our lives in a way that would have been invaluable. How else can you explain that my family has been and still are, in some cases: physical therapists(2), occupational therapist, special education teacher, rehabilitation counselor for the deaf, and directors of camps for disabled children(2)?
Every stone tossed in a pond creates a ripple with the potential to become a tide. Who would stand at the shore and catch the stones, deciding which should be cast? I’ll fight that person until I draw my last breath.
We are having this debate now, but about our elderly, sick cat. I know, it’s a cat and not a child, but the similarities are there.
How long can he live? Is he really in pain? If we put him down will we be doing him a favor, or cutting his life short unecessarily?
Just like with cats, infants cannot talk and tell you what hurts. It’s incredibly frustrating.
I wouldn’t even know what to do in these cases, except to take each case individually. The facts have to be taken into consideration and parents need to make informed decisions about their baby’s care. All we can hope for is that these infants live as much of a pain-free life for as long as they can.
I am not much of a believer in God as I am that things happen for a reason. These babies have been born for a reason instead of passing while in the womb. Maybe that means we need to pay attention to see if there are signs that the baby can thrive, eventually.
ugh, how rough
Before having 3B, I perhaps could have discussed this dispassionately, but now that we have our own baby, I really can’t see the sense in removing life support or killing a newborn, particularly one that is expected to live a short lifetime. What’s the hurry?
If there is pain and suffering, that certainly complicates the decisions to be made, but would we remove life support from a 15-year old just because she was enduring chronic pain? Would we euthanize her? Perhaps it’s easier for doctors to consider these actions with patients who haven’t shown their potential yet, but before they do, perhaps they should consider the story that you yourself highlighted about Team Hoyt (http://www.theblogfathers.com/2006/10/31/not-fit-to-be-a-parent/), which shows how easy it is for doctors to overlook the potential that parents can see.
It is a dangerous slope - like the slope of genetic testing. If this , that or the other condition is a reason to terminate, at what point do we start terminating for sex, or physical appearance, or because even though the fetus won’t have a certain disorder, they carry the recessive gene for it…
If money (or the lack thereof) is the only reason to euthanize a child (or an adult), then we need to seriously rethink what we do with our money. If the person is suffering, than it’s still debateable - but the question does need to be adressed.
(I am very pro-choice, though; needed to throw that out.)
Man, there are some heavy post’s here. The prom one and now this. I love blogs because of the thinking they make me do.
[…] There is a passionate debate going on in United Kingdom regarding a request to discuss if "severely damaged" newborns should be killed instead of facing suffering and expensive care. I talked about this on The Blogfathers yesterday and just wanted to throw out the question to see how people feel about this becoming reality at one point in the future. I think debate is great and it is no surprise that people are completely against ever killing a newborn. One of the replies, from Vinny over at The Digital Father, was so fantastic and inspirational I wanted to post it here as well. Here is how Vinny replied to my question, "Would You Kill Your Very Sick Newborn?": At the same time my mother was pregnant with me, my grandmother (at the time in her forties) became pregnant with my aunt. At her birth, she was mongoloid, mentally retarded, and had a hole between two of the chambers of her heart. She was not expected to live past the age of five, and at a time where institutionalization of the retarded was still a very real option for most families. […]
After knowing so many couples with fertilitiy issues and trying for over year to get pregnant with my wife, I would have a hard time destroying any newborn life no matter how sick he or she is.
We are given things for a reason and it is all in how we handle them.
Very, very interesting debate. Thank you to Vinny for his very insightful comment. To stir the pot… it’s also interesting that this debate is taking place in the UK, where they oppose the death penalty completely. Your question of “And what if we’re wrong? Even if it’s just once?” is the primary reason I oppose the death penalty. Innocent people have died on death row amidst all of the guilty there, because death row is managed by people, and people make mistakes.
I know the two issues are not the same, but if you’re talking about society deciding when and how to take a life, there is some overlap.
The way I feel about it is the same as if it was me hooked up to a machine. If I can not breathe on my own AND have no hope of recovery then I want the machines shut off so that I can be in peace. Anything else would be murder in my eyes. I could not kill my baby just because it might be in pain. For example Dwarfism causes intense agony in infants but does that justifiy putting them to sleep as infants?
[…] I commented on The Blogfathers to a post on the active euthanasia debate in the UK. I’m not a huge fan of cross-posting, but I haven’t blogged here ina while, and I cried writing it, so I thought we could all use a little catharsis today. After all- it’s Monday! (PS- please go and see the original post- I know the comments will fly!) At the same time my mother was pregnant with me, my grandmother (at the time in her forties) became pregnant with my aunt. At her birth, she was mongoloid, mentally retarded, and had a hole between two of the chambers of her heart. She was not expected to live past the age of five, and at a time where institutionalization of the retarded was still a very real option for most families. […]
My wife works as a nurse at a local hospital in the states, and I am a stay at home dad. The idea of having a perfect child is everyone’s dream, that wants to become a parent. The problem starts when you hear the words, there maybe a problem, somethings wrong. Your heart runs away, sinks into a void. The real point is, you got married for better or for worse. Well my friend having a disabled child is part of that.
We cannot make a choice of life or death for another living soul. It is our obligation to make sure that child we brought into this world has every fighting chance to make it!
Cures are coming out very fast for some diseases, and defects. Imagine you decide to euthanize a child, then the very next day a cure is found! How bad would you feel? I for one would not be able to live with myself! Imagine how the Doctor that KILLED your child would feel.
+á+Ã+á+Ï+áòÀà]+à+Ø+à+
+à+Æ+à+Õ+à+Ñ+à+Ñ+áòÀÚ+à+