Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Kathryn you seem to be a softhearted person who sees good in most things and in people.
That's not bad, you're likely a far happier person than I am, who sees the hideousness of people's actions clearly. I mean that sincerely not snarkily. Being a cold realist is not a primrose path.
What you (and many others with big hearts) may not see is that some parents, and I especially mean the "parade around like the world's ugliest dog" (Thanks MordinS) types who LOVE to gather ALL KINDS of attention from all sources for their "precious angel", you know the kind like these parents, always having fundraisers, plastering social media with updates, even getting on TV, being all vocal and LOUD (figuratively) about how SPECIAL their kid is AND getting all kinds of attention and praise in volume for being such special parents, are more into the ATTENTION and GAIN for themselves rather than a pure love for the kid.
I've seen this with parents of kids with cancer too. They love to GET ATTENTION. Be told how awesome they are. Pageant mentality types. Why not live quietly?
This is done under the guise of "raise awareness". Please.
Consider this: is it any less loving for a parent to prefer a child die than live life severely impaired?
I have always had more of a problem thinking of a helpless creature suffering than I do with it dying. Suffering bothers me. A lot.
Especially when the sufferer is helpless to end its own life (using IT because I apply this to humans and animals) and its existence is marginal and causes all kinds of issues for society as these profoundly neurologically malformed patients do.
In THIS case the kid is too malformed to suffer, as his brain is mostly absent. So it becomes even more a societal issue and all about the PARENTS who prob will have a reality show next.
Last edited by VexedAndSolitary; 09-30-2015 at 07:00 AM..
Well, the ins. premium thing crossed my mind, since I buy my own and the cost is exorbitant. I gather that you don't pay for your own full premium.
When I see morbidly obese people, people with diabetes, and other conditions, I know that that person probably is the cause for my insurer pulling its PPOs out of my state (because they would have the raise the premiums so high in order to make a decent profit), because of all the high claims.
I am now affected by everyone's medical claims, because THEY don't pay for it (like auto ins). We all do, now.
I'm glad someone mentioned this.
Many companies (mine included) are shifting employees onto high deductible plans with crappy coverage and high out-of-pocket maximums. They blame "Obamacare" but the truth is that healthcare costs were out of control WELL before the ACA.
Any way you slice it, health insurance is a cost borne by society at large, not just the insured themselves. I'm sure this baby's father's company is super-happy that this baby is costing its insurance plan a small fortune. This may (and probably will) result in higher premiums...which the employer may or may not pass on to the employees. Either way it affects the employees since even if they don't pay higher premiums, they'll take a hit somewhere else (tech upgrades, pay raises, bonuses, etc.). The company will offset the cost any way it can.
If the father doesn't have coverage through his employer, he's either paying for private health insurance on or off the government exchange; either one will result in higher costs for everyone. Cases like this always do.
If the family or just the baby is on Medicaid or any other kind of subsidized program, guess what? We're ALL paying for it.
I know that there seems to be no such thing as "society" anymore, especially in the United States, because people are seemingly incapable of seeing past the ends of their own noses. They don't realize that the choices they make impact all of us.
So yes, for that reason alone, I think preserving this baby's life regardless of his QOL, lifespan, or intellectual/physical disabilities is selfish at best.
Who is paying to keep it alive? Tax payer money? I imagine the treatment is incredibly expensive.
Well, I know there is a GoFundMe account but I'm not sure how they are paying for everything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OverItAll
Kathryn you seem to be a softhearted person who sees good in most things and in people.
That's not bad, you're likely a far happier person than I am, who sees the hideousness of people's actions clearly. I mean that sincerely not snarkily. Being a cold realist is not a primrose path.
What you (and many others with big hearts) may not see is that some parents, and I especially mean the "parade around like the world's ugliest dog" (Thanks MordinS) types who LOVE to gather ALL KINDS of attention from all sources for their "precious angel", you know the kind like these parents, always having fundraisers, plastering social media with updates, even getting on TV, being all vocal and LOUD (figuratively) about how SPECIAL their kid is AND getting all kinds of attention and praise in volume for being such special parents, are more into the ATTENTION and GAIN for themselves rather than a pure love for the kid.
I've seen this with parents of kids with cancer too. They love to GET ATTENTION. Be told how awesome they are. Pageant mentality types. Why not live quietly?
This is done under the guise of "raise awareness". Please.
Consider this: is it any less loving for a parent to prefer a child die than live life severely impaired?
I have always had more of a problem thinking of a helpless creature suffering than I do with it dying. Suffering bothers me. A lot.
Especially when the sufferer is helpless to end its own life (using IT because I apply this to humans and animals) and its existence is marginal and causes all kinds of issues for society as these profoundly neurologically malformed patients do.
In THIS case the kid is too malformed to suffer, as his brain is mostly absent. So it becomes even more a societal issue and all about the PARENTS who prob will have a reality show next.
The answser to your question is "No". It is not any less loving to prevent suffering and a severely restricted existence.
Kathryn you seem to be a softhearted person who sees good in most things and in people.
That's not bad, you're likely a far happier person than I am, who sees the hideousness of people's actions clearly. I mean that sincerely not snarkily. Being a cold realist is not a primrose path.
LOL thanks but actually I'm very much a realist. If you want to know the truth, I'm a pretty skeptical person and tend to be more logical and objective than is comfortable to lots of people but hey, that's how I'm wired! I am, however, basically a very positive person. I know, weird combo but it works for me.
Quote:
What you (and many others with big hearts) may not see is that some parents, and I especially mean the "parade around like the world's ugliest dog" (Thanks MordinS) types who LOVE to gather ALL KINDS of attention from all sources for their "precious angel", you know the kind like these parents, always having fundraisers, plastering social media with updates, even getting on TV, being all vocal and LOUD (figuratively) about how SPECIAL their kid is AND getting all kinds of attention and praise in volume for being such special parents, are more into the ATTENTION and GAIN for themselves rather than a pure love for the kid.
I know the type you're talking about but I don't get this vibe from these parents. What I get from them is that they do want to show the world that there is an alternative to defaulting to abortion. I also get the distinct impression that they sincerely love this child and that he brings them joy and that he is a contented little guy.
Quote:
I've seen this with parents of kids with cancer too. They love to GET ATTENTION. Be told how awesome they are. Pageant mentality types. Why not live quietly?
This is done under the guise of "raise awareness". Please.
I don't apply blanket assumptions to people. One of my best friends, for instance, has a daughter with Cystic Fybrosis. This used to be a death sentence, but there is ongoing research and new treatments that offer new hope to those with this disease and their families. My friend runs marathons to raise funds for continuing research. She posts videos online and a couple of times a year asks for donations, and that's fine by me. She isn't "living quietly" but she's definitely not seeking attention or adulation for herself. She is passionate about research and new treatments for the disease that has affected her family so severely.
I also have a very good friend who has a daughter with Down's Syndrome - pretty severe Down's Syndrome in fact. She is very open about all this on Facebook and other social media. She is passionate about her work with special needs kids, especially those with Down's Syndrome, and she often posts all sorts of stuff about it online. Her daughter is a joy. Yes, she is also a lot of "bother" and she does not have a good long term prognosis, but she and her mom ADORE each other and bring each other lots of joy. My friend is very passionate about showing the positive side of life with a person with this syndrome and about the unconventional beauty of their lives. She wants to encourage other parents to feel hope and joy instead of nothing but grief and pain if they are told their child has Down's Syndrome.
This is the same sense that I get from the parents of Jaxon. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know, but that's the impression they give me. And I have no problem extending the benefit of the doubt to these parents. I feel empathetic toward them - as I would ANYONE who was presented with the awful situation and such terrible options, and no good option.
Quote:
Consider this: is it any less loving for a parent to prefer a child die than live life severely impaired?
Consider this: Is it any less loving for a parent to give their child every possible chance at life? What makes you think that Jaxon is suffering unduly? He doesn't seem to be in much, if any pain. He seems well taken care of. He appears to be surrounded by love.
Quote:
I have always had more of a problem thinking of a helpless creature suffering than I do with it dying. Suffering bothers me. A lot.
Jaxon is not a pet. He is a human being. Of COURSE I don't like to see any human being suffer, but I'm not convinced that Jaxon is suffering at all. Not only that, life entails some suffering - sometimes even for our children.
There are valid moral reasons why we can't just choose to put someone down like we can choose to put a pet down. For instance, I have a very old, very fat cat. So far, other than being overweight, his health is good. But I've already decided that if he gets diabetes, I'm not going to prolong his life. The minute I think he's begun suffering, I'm going to have him put down. But I wouldn't do that with a child, of course!
Quote:
Especially when the sufferer is helpless to end its own life (using IT because I apply this to humans and animals) and its existence is marginal and causes all kinds of issues for society as these profoundly neurologically malformed patients do.
So would you suggest euthanasia for my friend's daughter? She's got profound Down's Syndrome. She's had to endure multiple surgeries and has more in her future. She will never be anywhere close to "normal." I guess she's causing all kinds of issues for society and for her family. But guess what - she's happy and so are her parents and her siblings.
I'm sure her parents' insurance company is not so happy, but que sera sera. Surely we're not going to start judging the value of human life on the cost of insurance premiums, are we?
Do you know if the parents have health insurance? The father is working but the mother quit her job to stay home with Jaxon and care for him.
And by the way, he is functioning - just not like most people function.
Define functioning?
" So the Florida family headed to Boston to drop by the city’s top-rated Children’s Hospital, which houses a famous pediatric neurology department, unannounced.
“Our plan was to go to the emergency room because they can’t turn you away,” Brittany Buell told the Boston outlet. “We walked in and said ‘We’re here from Florida.’”
It sounds like above the parents aren't in sync with reality. The kid is a vegetable. Sad, yes, but what kind of life is one that will be contained to a wheel chair and your only function is blinking. It's a huge drain on resources and the family both emotionally and financially.
Nope, I'm not assuming that - YOU'RE assuming that I'm assuming.
And I'm not going to explain in detail exactly why I said what I said - again. For the third time. I'm getting tired of writing it all out over and over again.
We get it, it was for their own good. Because parents either going through this or having gone through this would not understand the gravity of the situation until you, very helpfully, pointed it out. Because, dammit, they need to understand what they're doing! And then considerately adding a nice little anecdote about how the doctors were wrong about your granddaughter, so that anyone who's made the choice to terminate their pregnancy because of a dire prognosis can now second guess their decision and wonder if they made the right choice all over again. (No I know, you're not responsible for that, even though you are apparently responsible for making sure everyone understands the reality of their choice.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by KathrynAragon
The truth of the matter is that neither you nor I can tell much about Jaxon's state of being from the video. That being said, he does not appear to be suffering and he does appear to be bringing joy to his parents.
Like the old saying goes, some people see a glass half empty and some see it half full.
Jaxon is not likely to live very long but it seems pretty obvious to me that his parents love him and that while he is on this earth, he is being well taken care of, which is more than I can say for plenty of perfectly healthy children, unfortunately.
I'm glad the parents got to spend time with him. Truly. Although they made their choice for religious reasons, not anything to do with the child's actual welfare. There was no consideration of terminating the pregnancy, they're conservative Christians.
I'm also glad for the people who made the right decision for themselves by terminating, and hope they never regret for one day that they did it.
" So the Florida family headed to Boston to drop by the city’s top-rated Children’s Hospital, which houses a famous pediatric neurology department, unannounced.
“Our plan was to go to the emergency room because they can’t turn you away,” Brittany Buell told the Boston outlet. “We walked in and said ‘We’re here from Florida.’”
It sounds like above the parents aren't in sync with reality. The kid is a vegetable. Sad, yes, but what kind of life is one that will be contained to a wheel chair and your only function is blinking. It's a huge drain on resources and the family both emotionally and financially.
They made an informed decision and are clearly committed to providing the best life possible for their child, who doesn't appear to be suffering.
It's their business. It's their child, for God's sake.
Kathryn YES I would endorse euthanasia in cases where the parents cannot financially support a human being who is unable to contribute to society.
Yes I KNOW that sounds Nazi-esque.
If a family wants to nurture a child with impairments that would render it unable to be a productive member, as long as they can do without affecting (costing) society as a whole, that's OK by me. YES this would limit that privilege to the wealthy.
YES I would euthanize my own child (were it legal and allowed) if it had ANY degenerative terminal illness. I woud NEVER ask for "help" for MY CHILD from strangers. It's MY responsibility.
Were I to develop an illness that made me miserable, I would do as that girl in Oregon (who also loved attention as she broadcast what she did to the world. Why? Why not just do it privately?) and kill myself.
Until the sixties MANY physicians and scientists encouraged allowing severely malformed neonates to die.
They were not all "Nazis" I am sure.
I also would sterililze welfare mothers (longterm users of the system. not those who use it responsibly and for short term help), drug addicts and child abusers, so I understand my views are not mainstream.
Among other things ... he can see, he can recognize his parents and he can talk.
From his FB page ..
"Tomorrow, Jax will be 13 months old. It’s hard not to think about how this all started and where we are today. Most importantly, Jaxon is still here with us, still learning, still developing, still thriving. He’s back to smiling at us, always so happy in the morning after he wakes up and takes turns looking at both Mommy’s and Daddy’s face, seemingly as if he is so excited to start another day. He is talking up a storm these days, truly teaching himself how to communicate with us in his own way, in his own language, and we actually understand it after learning with him for these 13 months. He says “Mama”, and he says “Ah Ah” (Dadda), and “Addy” (Daddy). I love that. Jaxon is simply that, Jaxon. He is so normal in so many ways."
No brain? How often does he update his FB status? I know folks with fully functioning brains who post every 30 mins. I look at FB twice a week and have 94 alerts to such each time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
