Mother gives birth to a baby with Anencephaly.

[Zimbu]

I'd just like to point out that the baby is still a human.

 

I don't think it's a human. It doesn't have the capability or the potential to gain the capability to do any of the things that make human beings distinct from other creatures. It can't and no matter what it never will be able to use its hands, understand a language, do abstract reasoning or introspecting. How do define "human being" if you're able to make the claim that this creature is a human? It's like a braindead person who never was "brain alive".

 

 

 

I agree with Rien_Adelric as well. I don't want to think about what this corpse with functioning organs would look like at the age of four after never having used most of its skeletal muscles.

 

 

 

So parents of autists, Down syndrome, and children with other disabilities are stupid because they still love their children even though they won't be able to function fully in the world? I mean, this is a little different I know, but it's still her child and I'm sure she feels a similar bond.

 

They are not stupid because they have a child to love. People with disabilities are still people. This "mother" is carrying around a bag of organs and thinks that calling it a person putting a hat on it to cover its head when taking pictures will make it a person. That is a bit silly.

[sohkmj1]

It is time for my 2 cents.

 

Many people on this thread believe the baby should just be left to die. I can safely say less than 10% of the people who said that are not parents. You don't understand the bond a parent has with their child. Sure, it may be useless, dead weight, whatever, but it IS their child, and if they want to keep it, then so be it.

 

Honestly, if you ask me, if the mother really wanted the baby to die, she would have aborted it when informed of the kid she was going to have. I'm probably going to get flamed my [wagon] off for this, but I was just really sickened for some unknown reason.

 

 

 

Please try to understand the parent's plight.

[Laura]

The baby is pretty much equivalent to a god damn plant. No consciousness, but it does move. So it's like a venus fly trap, but not as cool

 

If you had to carry around a ten pound plant in your body for nine months and go into labour for half a day just to get it out I think you'd want to keep that plant for awhile and not just toss it in the trash at first sight. Let the lady think things through.. you obviously aren't putting yourself in her shoes or you wouldn't be so quick to judge.

I agree. To her, this is the work of God purely keeping this child alive. More so because statistically this child was supposed to die after death. If the doctors missed and denied as much as she says, I'm wondering what else was missed. Sure, this child will never be capable of higher thought but it's still a human. Casting it away after the mother has developed such a bond is and would be very difficult.

[RichieMcD]

So parents of autists, Down syndrome, and children with other disabilities are stupid because they still love their children even though they won't be able to function fully in the world? I mean, this is a little different I know, but it's still her child and I'm sure she feels a similar bond.

 

 

 

Lent, comparing those mental disabilities to this one in question is a huge difference. Although all the ones you mentioned require assistance till their trained for basic functions, the baby in question can never properly function, she'll never talk, she'll never hear, she'll never see, she'll never have a life comparable to a Human person.

 

 

 

As countless others have said, she's essentially a plant, she moves slightly, breathes, digests food and has no thought process at all. If you take other things into account, she's actually less advanced than a standard plant, considering she can't sexually reproduce. (probably a bit controversial, not meaning to offend.)

 

 

 

This is another problem with religion being taken to far, any person with a drop of intelligence would realise for the baby's and their own good to terminate the pregnancy. I think this extract from her blog is a testament to how ignorant and god-fearing this woman is.

 

 

 

So to all of you who sent me hate mail and to all of you who are posting cruel things about my daughter on the internet, I hope your demons are on their way out... You can't expect to say such things about one of God's precious little children and then go unpunished, so I would repent if I were you... or you're in for it. You people posting vile things on the internet about my daughter, you are IN for it. There is a place for people with such hatred and perversion in their hearts, and believe me, it's not a place where you want to go. But that is where you are heading. In a nutshell, Jesus is your only hope. Or you're in for a good long (and well-deserved) burning. That being said, God Bless you all! Even you incredibly evil, demonized people :) P.S. See an exorcist ASAP

[Returned3]

Thank god I opened the picture in my school's lab with tons of students around me.

 

 

 

To be very honest, that "Baby" looks more like a Frog/Alien decoration than a human being. I mean, if it senses pain then killing it would be wrong. But it dosen't feel pain, can't see, can't hear, can't speak, is unconscious and can't even think. The baby's probably going to die soon anyway, why not just end it's suffering (If it has any) early.

 

 

 

I hate vegetables.

 

I blame whomever she had sex with

[Omar]

I think it's a bit of a waste... Maybe all that food could be given to someone who actually needs it instead of someone that doesn't know he's being fed - or even that he's alive.

[Zimbu]

it's still a human

 

Again, I would like to hear the definition of "human being" that allows making this claim. Sure, it has organs formed by cells with the human genome. The cells can also be kept alive as long as a hose keeps bringing food to its stomach. I guess if that's enough for you then fine, but for me this child is as complete a human as my own right arm which I'm sure medical science will eventually be able keep alive on its own even if the rest of me dies.

 

 

 

I realize that there is a strong bond between a mother and a child and I have no reason to believe that this mother doesn't feel the same feelings as any other mother, but that doesn't change the cold reality. This child has never been alive in any real sense of the word and it's not healthy that she treats it as if it were a living child.

[Bauke]

If it's human, it has the right to have a humane existance. This is not what I call a "life". I'd have the decency to euthanize the baby. The mother here is a cruel religious nut, imo.

[Racheya]

It is time for my 2 cents.

 

Many people on this thread believe the baby should just be left to die. I can safely say less than 10% of the people who said that are not parents. You don't understand the bond a parent has with their child. Sure, it may be useless, dead weight, whatever, but it IS their child, and if they want to keep it, then so be it.

 

Honestly, if you ask me, if the mother really wanted the baby to die, she would have aborted it when informed of the kid she was going to have. I'm probably going to get flamed my [wagon] off for this, but I was just really sickened for some unknown reason.

 

 

 

Please try to understand the parent's plight.

 

87% of statistics are made up 98% of the time.

 

 

 

I don't particularly care - if she wants to dress it up and play mummy with her alien then it's fine by me, but if it's wasting medical resources I say no :|

 

 

 

It's a horrible, sad thing, but keeping it alive is going to do absoloutely nothing good. It's not alive, it can't talk or walk or even see. It never HAS been alive or ever will. It's not like keeping a person in a coma alive where I can understand there is a moral dilemma.

[EdgedThesis]

I do not feel for something that cannot feel,

 

but I do for the mother.

 

 

 

She has been crushed by circumstance in to a state of such pitiful denial.

 

Her faculties have been eroded by tragedy,

 

and there is no doubt that her sanity will be destroyed upon discovery that no, her child does not function, cannot function, and will not function.

 

 

 

I anticipate one moment of enlightenment, in which all the implications of this will hit her at once. No pride over school drawings, nothing to be boast of in terms of school, no prospective son-in-law to await. Any life that sparkles in her eyes will wink out, returning only with intensive therapy (or if she's so devout, force of religious will).

 

 

 

I anticipate all of this--and I grieve for her now.

[Barihawk]

So my question is:

 

 

 

Whatever happened to pro-choice? If she wants to keep the child and care for it until it dies of natural causes, that's totally her choice. The baby can breathe on it's own, it can feed itself, it can do anything instinctual. Eventually that baby is going to die. But for Pete's sake, let her have that time.

 

 

 

Should we start euthanizing [developmentally delayed]ed kids while we are at it? What is the basis for euthanasia here? The child is not in pain nor is it having to rely on a machine to keep it going. The only basis for the claims in this thread is that it will not grow up to live a productive life. Will someone with severe Downes ever grow up to have a job and work, or be anything else than a total burden on their caretaker? Heavily [developmentally delayed]ed kids are not going to go to work or raise a family, but we would not think of "mercy killing" them, would we?

[Flodder450]

I was going "0_o" at the picture of the staring baby on Wikipedia

 

Sad......... :(

[EdgedThesis]

So my question is:

 

 

 

Whatever happened to pro-choice? If she wants to keep the child and care for it until it dies of natural causes, that's totally her choice. The baby can breathe on it's own, it can feed itself, it can do anything instinctual. Eventually that baby is going to die. But for Pete's sake, let her have that time.

 

 

 

Should we start euthanizing [developmentally delayed] kids while we are at it? What is the basis for euthanasia here? The child is not in pain nor is it having to rely on a machine to keep it going. The only basis for the claims in this thread is that it will not grow up to live a productive life. Will someone with severe Downes ever grow up to have a job and work, or be anything else than a total burden on their caretaker? Heavily [developmentally delayed] kids are not going to go to work or raise a family, but we would not think of "mercy killing" them, would we?

 

 

 

I think less 'productivity' and more 'it cannot feel'. As of now it is an object, the kidney stone you keep in a jar to remind you of your operation.

 

 

 

And the pain will be greater once that object of sentimental value simply disappears.

 

 

 

When it comes to those with Downes syndrome, the main cause of keeping them alive is that they can emote. They do not 'know', but they do feel. They respond. They show affection. They form bonds.

 

 

 

Anencephalic children are the equivalent of ultra-tech animatronics:

 

 

 

They are a symbol of weeks of work, they perform reflex responses, you can say they are created with the greatest detail in mechanism and circuitry--but they have no brain.

[warri0r45]

So my question is:

 

 

 

Whatever happened to pro-choice? If she wants to keep the child and care for it until it dies of natural causes, that's totally her choice. The baby can breathe on it's own, it can feed itself, it can do anything instinctual. Eventually that baby is going to die. But for Pete's sake, let her have that time.

 

 

 

Should we start euthanizing [developmentally delayed] kids while we are at it? What is the basis for euthanasia here? The child is not in pain nor is it having to rely on a machine to keep it going. The only basis for the claims in this thread is that it will not grow up to live a productive life. Will someone with severe Downes ever grow up to have a job and work, or be anything else than a total burden on their caretaker? Heavily [developmentally delayed] kids are not going to go to work or raise a family, but we would not think of "mercy killing" them, would we?

 

 

 

However [developmentally delayed]ed a child may be, they can still get something out of life. It might not be the ideal life, but they can get something out of it nevertheless. Anencephaly doesn't give the sufferer a life at all. There's the difference. Ultimately the choice should be down to the parents but I can't think of any reason to keep it alive at all. It may seem cold, and please don't get the impression that I'm coming at this lightly, but that's how I feel about it.

[Bauke]

People with Down syndrome are quite often happy and enjoy life, and are able to function quite well, despite lacking mental capacity. Quite a bad comparison there.

[EdgedThesis]

People with Down syndrome are quite often happy and enjoy life, and are able to function quite well, despite lacking mental capacity. Quite a bad comparison there.

 

 

 

If you were replying to me--

 

 

 

I already agreed with that point.

 

I used those afflicted with Down syndrome as a foil to those with anencephaly.

[wild_goat_14]

So my question is:

 

 

 

Whatever happened to pro-choice? If she wants to keep the child and care for it until it dies of natural causes, that's totally her choice. The baby can breathe on it's own, it can feed itself, it can do anything instinctual. Eventually that baby is going to die. But for Pete's sake, let her have that time.

 

 

 

Should we start euthanizing [developmentally delayed] kids while we are at it? What is the basis for euthanasia here? The child is not in pain nor is it having to rely on a machine to keep it going. The only basis for the claims in this thread is that it will not grow up to live a productive life. Will someone with severe Downes ever grow up to have a job and work, or be anything else than a total burden on their caretaker? Heavily [developmentally delayed] kids are not going to go to work or raise a family, but we would not think of "mercy killing" them, would we?

 

 

 

However [developmentally delayed] a child may be, they can still get something out of life. It might not be the ideal life, but they can get something out of it nevertheless. Anencephaly doesn't give the sufferer a life at all. There's the difference. Ultimately the choice should be down to the parents but I can't think of any reason to keep it alive at all. It may seem cold, and please don't get the impression that I'm coming at this lightly, but that's how I feel about it.

 

 

 

Exactly. I don't know a whole lot about the brain, but I bet this child is probably blind, deaf, and paralyzed. The child doesn't even know it is there. It can't feel pain, it can't do anything. Honestly, there isn't a person there, just a body with a beating heart.

 

 

 

The mother should let the baby go, and save some other baby's life with transplant organs.

[sohkmj1]

It is time for my 2 cents.

 

Many people on this thread believe the baby should just be left to die. I can safely say less than 10% of the people who said that are not parents. You don't understand the bond a parent has with their child. Sure, it may be useless, dead weight, whatever, but it IS their child, and if they want to keep it, then so be it.

 

Honestly, if you ask me, if the mother really wanted the baby to die, she would have aborted it when informed of the kid she was going to have. I'm probably going to get flamed my [wagon] off for this, but I was just really sickened for some unknown reason.

 

 

 

Please try to understand the parent's plight.

 

87% of statistics are made up 98% of the time.

 

 

 

I don't particularly care - if she wants to dress it up and play mummy with her alien then it's fine by me, but if it's wasting medical resources I say no :|

 

 

 

It's a horrible, sad thing, but keeping it alive is going to do absoloutely nothing good. It's not alive, it can't talk or walk or even see. It never HAS been alive or ever will. It's not like keeping a person in a coma alive where I can understand there is a moral dilemma.

 

Well hey, since you want to look at it in the productive area, the hospital is getting money for basically nothing.

[brunokiller]

Interesting...

[Tim]

Forgive the Swearing.

 

 

 

Jesus [bleep]ing Christ....

 

 

 

After seeing a picture of Anencephaly...I honestly don't know what to say. To even THINK It's alive if a nieve, selfish and absolutly blasphemous act of nature itself. I can't belive she has the nerve to dare say we need to meet an Exorcist, She needs to be (and im sorry if this sounds drastic) Executed by a damn Exorcist for this act. Im not Christian but, [bleep], thats just a horrendous act.

 

 

 

I honestly feel sick now viewing that image, and its not easy to make me feel sick either...

[l0l0lpur34]

She should be able to keep it until it dies of natural causes if she wants, I can't believe some of the people on here making comments like "kill it" and calling it an "alien".

[Mr_Adam]

It's easy enough to say kill it, but it is the mother's child, and she undoubtedly has an unnaturally powerful bond with it.

 

 

 

The baby will die. Inevitably. It can't feed itself, it has no senses, it won't be able to grow, and anything requiring any thought at all, or anything covered in the brain will be impossible.

 

 

 

Let the mother do what she wants.

 

 

 

PS. The Wiki picture reminded me of E.T.

[Omar]

She should be able to keep it until it dies of natural causes if she wants.

 

I agree. I can easily understand the point of view of those people saying "kill it" though. I just hope the organs are donated like someone mentioned, though with the religious beliefs she has, she might not do it.

[Housepig]

There is realy no reason to keep it alive. It may not be suffering, but the mother will go through the agony of both the baby's death and realisation that it's not living anyway, so I say, best to get it over with quickly. The longer she keeps on deluding herself, the more it will hurt to realise. It may sound cruel, but forced euthanasia is the best option.

 

 

 

I was appalled by her comments on people who disagree with her burning in hell. It's sickening to think that there are people who actualy think like that. Religion is one thing, but that is just...beyond words.

 

 

 

"This is real life, not a text book." Has she ever considered the fact that textbooks are about real life? Or does she think they just sprang into being, an alternate reality where the world is different?

[Seraphi]

I can see the mother in a few years, sitting in a hospital, saying "when is my daughter getting back from school" to herself over and over.

 

 

 

I don't think the mother will be able to lead a normal life again, since she is so deeply religious, if she kills it (In my eyes, the correct thing to do, since it is not truly alive) she will be tormented by the fact that she has bisobeyed her god's will, and if she keeps it and it dies of natural causes(which it will, very soon), she will be just as a normal mother would be with a lost child would be, utterly distraught