Physically Disabled People Deserve a Chance at Life, Not Condemned to Abortion

[juliee]

The doctor had worked heroically to ensure that the baby would be born and that his mother would survive. However, after the physician determined to himself that the baby would be “better off dead,” little Chet McDoniel was placed in a crib in a corner of the room and left to die. But Chet survived. In fact, he thrived.

LifeNews.com/state5019.html

 

[the_phoenix]

“Before his appearance at Morning Star, a rainbow appeared in the sky above the hotel—an appropriate sign of hope for a man who demonstrates that disability should never be a disqualifier for life.”

:heaven:

 

[vera_dicere]

carlagolden.blogs.com/carla_goldens_blog/2007/08/nick-has-no-arm.html

 

[flyingfish]

Gene based treatments that would prevent this kind of thing would also mean the person referenced in the OP would not exist. Does it mean we should not try to eliminate genetic abnormalities?

 

[vera_dicere]

Gene based treatments that would prevent this kind of thing would also mean the person referenced in the OP would not exist. Does it mean we should not try to eliminate genetic abnormalities?

Depends how you think “eliminate genetic abnormalities” should be carried out.

Usually it involves flushing defective embryos down the sink, or aborting children when they are discovered to be less than society’s “ideal”.

I for one have no problem with non-destructive/fatal research that can lead to medical and pharmacological intervention.

 

[Hereswith]

Stories like that one kind of make me wince, because they are misleading. I worked for a while as a counselor with parents of kids with developmental disabilities, and learned a lot. For every “Chet”. . . there are many others whose story is different.

I attended a lecture by a well-known medical ethicist (sorry his name escapes me right now) and he made me think. Modern medicine allows us to keep a newborn alive artificially. But is it always God’s intent? Some of these infants if left to either survive or no, will not live. I’m not sure it is always ethical for us to keep alive that which God has not equipped to live.

First, I have trouble believing that story, because I have worked in medicine and I know the rules and laws in play. An infant is not “left in the corner” to die. They may be intentionally disconnected from life support, and then they are very closely monitored! (In some states, they can’t be disconnected even if the doctor and parents believe it is best.)

Parents who raise children with severe developmental disabilities live through Hell every single day. I know, because I’ve counseled them. They LOVE these kids. But they are financially and emotionally stretched to the point where many are destroyed. Few of these marriages survive, in fact. The rate of parental mental illnesses and suicide is very high.
When these kids are alive solely because of radical medical intervention - well-intentioned as it might be - and nothing else, I can’t believe it is as God intended.

The story bothers me because I don’t believe it - it is innaccurate from what I know to be true, and also because it is very disrespectful to physicians too. Blind propoganda can be cruel and sinful, and based on lies - even if you favor its message, it still is sinful.

Just to qualify - I’m talking about kids with the kinds of disabilities that make life without constant mechanical intervention impossible. I’m not talking about Down Syndrome!

I’m just saying that we have to be very careful to have our facts straight, and to be fair, if we want our message to hold water.

 

[vera_dicere]

I attended a lecture by a well-known medical ethicist (sorry his name escapes me right now) and he made me think. Modern medicine allows us to keep a newborn alive artificially. But is it always God’s intent? Some of these infants if left to either survive or no, will not live. I’m not sure it is always ethical for us to keep alive that which God has not equipped to live.

Chet had limb deformity. You can live without arms and legs. It is society that must adapt to meet their needs, children shouldn’t be killed or “left to die” because they have no limbs, or deformed limbs.

This Chet fella, I’m not sure how old he is, but he seems to be an adult, perhaps in his late 20s, he has a wife and child, so maybe even his 30s. 30, even 20 years ago doctors weren’t really equipped to deal with this sort of thing, and yeah, children were just left to die. Most of my senior collegues have stories about deformed or disabled children rushed out of the room and left to die away from the parents. It was beleived back then, they were doing the parents a favour.

Though, I do understand where you’re coming from, especially when we start talkign about children who require around the clock intervention to survive, and have massive disabilities because of premature birth or defect. I think the end decision must be made by the parents as to whether a child is resussed, as at that age, it can do more harm than good, and often we hear stories of a child with obvious deformities born in cardiac and respiartory arrest and the doctors and nurses bring them back round. The kid spends months in SCBU and then its the parents who have the next 30, 40 odd years this person lives to deal with the financial and emotional burden their disability brings.

However, I have to dissagree with you on the whole “God not equiping these children to live” part, I dont’ imagine God reaches down and swishes His well manicured finger through the DNA of zygotes with the sole of intention of them dying after birth, bad biology brought on by the wages of sin has put this upon us, and children.

There is a difference in acknowledging defects that are incompatible with life and letting that child die naturally, and getting our knickers in a bunch over a child with limb defects and encouraging death. Because honestly, its not much of a stretch to go from the mindset that “God doesn’t want them to live” to “It must be okay to kill them then”.

 

[Hereswith]

Chet had limb deformity. You can live without arms and legs. It is society that must adapt to meet their needs, children shouldn’t be killed or “left to die” because they have no limbs, or deformed limbs.

That’s another thing that troubles me about the story. If it were only a limb deformity, why would he have died if left unattended?

Basically, I agree with you about everything. I’m talking specifically about keeping infants alive artificially. And unfortunately, yes, some are not meant to live by natural means, obviously. God’s reasoning is beyond me, and beyond you too.

There is a difference in acknowledging defects that are incompatible with life and letting that child die naturally, and getting our knickers in a bunch over a child with limb defects and encouraging death.

Absolutely.