On Feb 23, 4:17*pm, Canuck57 wrote:
On 22/02/2011 8:37 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote:









In ,
says...

On 22/02/2011 12:42 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote:

http://www.allamericanblogger.com/14...panel-decides-
baby-should-die-canadian-court-agrees/

Yeah, just what we need.

Read up on if from other sources. *What a situation.... I just hope they
do what is best for the kid and to hell with the rest of them. *But
admit, I am not sure what that is. *Glad I don't have to decide this
one, pirates is easy, not so in this case.

I saw the father interviewed today. He says all he wants is for the baby
to have a tracheotomy, and let them take him home. He says there is
therapy if only they can clear the mucus from his throat and lungs.

Therapy maybe, but I am unclear on the facts not published. *Is the baby
sentient? Aware? Brain dead? *Exact no emotions or BS, what is the exact
state of the child's mind.

Hey, with today's technology you could pick up a roast going to the
supermarket and put tubes and chemicals to keep it alive, but should you?

Some real ethical issues in this, slippery slopes too.

So it really boils down to how much benefit is it for the child to get
it and then go home?

--
Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when
no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing.

Well, on the News at 11, the Baby is still alive. All the Family wants
is to let the Baby die surrounded by Family.

On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 21:28:40 -0500, Gene
wrote:

I'm not signing on to Kevorkian's principles, but quality of life, I
believe, REALLY means something.......

Yes, not to mention inevitability of the outcome. An extra 6 weeks or
6 months of life means nothing to someone who is brain dead or
terminally comatose.

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 14:42:29 -0500, I_am_Tosk
wrote:



http://www.allamericanblogger.com/14...panel-decides-
baby-should-die-canadian-court-agrees/

Yeah, just what we need.

Don't you think insurance companies make the same decisions? If you
don't have pockets as deep a Croesus, the hospital is going to go with
"the payer," whether that be the government or the insurance company.

By your own quotations.... The child was in a "persistent vegetative
state" and "the couple has accepted their baby boy's inevitable
death." It seems the litigation was whether the child should suffer to
death in the home or stay in the hospital with professional care.

A "death panel" seems to be a meaningless concept when all parties
present agree that the child is terminally ill. To me, all of this
extraordinary effort at keeping a persons biological functions intact
seems terrifyingly close to Dr. Frankenstein's fascinations.

I'm not signing on to Kevorkian's principles, but quality of life, I
believe, REALLY means something.......

Professional care is to leave the kid in an incubator and wait until kid
dies. Seems a bit cold and heartless. If the kid goes home with the
parents the parents will do all that is necessary to make the kid
comfortable by giving it love and attention until the kid passes away.

Which environment would you rather die in? My daughter spend 2 months in
a Neo-natal ICU. There is no way I would want a child's last days,
hours, moments on earth spend in that environment.