Mother gives birth to a baby with Anencephaly.

[gonpost]

Hi guys,

 

 

 

I've had experience with an anencephalic baby first hand.

 

 

 

Many years ago now, there were several publicized cases of mothers throwing their babies in the trash (bathroom trash can, dumpster, etc). My neighbor across the street, who we'll call Erica, happened to be related to one of those mothers. She decided to care for the baby, since obviously the mother was not allowed to. However, this baby was born with anencephaly.

 

 

 

My sister and I were friends with Erica's two kids, and my mother talked to Erica from time to time. My mom and I went over to see the baby one time. Let me tell you, it was very strange. The baby did cry on occasion (or so Erica told us), but it was a really weird cry. It would not interact with you or ever acknowledge you. It really was like a little moving corpse. The only reason it might have seen alive at all is that we don't expect babies to do more than eat, sleep, and cry anyway. It had only a brain stem, the part of your brain which controls your basic functions.

 

 

 

After just a week or two, the baby died (or perhaps I should say ceased functioning) in Erica's arms. Babies with anencephaly never live past a few weeks, though most die immediately after birth or in a few hours. Maybe months if they have constant medical care, but they will die.

 

 

 

Now, if the parents of the baby want to have it, they should be able to. It's hard to persuade anyone that their baby isn't actually "alive" any more than an ant is alive. There's really nothing you can do to persuade the vast majority of mothers that it is indeed dead...

 

 

 

But I have to say this again. A baby with anencephaly is not conscious. It it not alive. It is a husk of what could have been a human being, but it is not a human being. I've seen one and it's really the truth. Comparing it with any mammal is wrong, frankly. It is not even on par with a gold fish, or that chicken you ate for dinner a few nights ago.

 

 

 

Therefore, a parent should not expect medical care beyond a hospital stay for a few days. And that is only for the sake of the parents. There is no life in the baby, and so letting it die more or less naturally is enough. Wasting resources on something which is not alive is a huge mistake when those resources could be used on a baby with a life.

[IGoddessI]

if she has she'd be arguing about how we all are bastards and should feel bad for ourselves for suggesting the baby be killed, then she'd stick up for the mother and be like "if that was my baby i'd keep it too! you don't know how it is to be a mother!" etc. personally, i'm indifferent. i just want the baby to die naturally and see the aftermath of that. or even better i'd like to see the baby grow up a few more years and see what the mother is saying when her kid still can't do anything but twitch and use only her life supporting functions.

 

 

 

oh, and btw, this is my first post on this thread. i read like 2 pages, and was linked to the site by faitherooski on msn. i laughed, a lot then decided i didn't really care.

 

 

 

Please don't ever attempt to guess my response again. In fact, don't use my name or refer to me in any of your posts from now on, that would be fantastic :

[Robert_de_Sable]

Nobody would ever approve on mass genocide for the "economy", we'd do more damage having no people to grow up to stimulate and preserve the economy.

 

When the hell is the last time you ever saw someone with Down's Syndrome stimulating our economy?

 

I fail to see how anyone could accept stem cell research and not this. This is killing people today for a better future tomorrow. Eventually we could completely eliminate diseases like Down's Syndrome and Autism.

 

 

 

I believe they can actually be taught to do some menial jobs, which in turn help to stimulate the economy.

 

 

 

Name me one exsisting government that will approve your mass genocide, without causing a war.

 

 

 

[bleep] nazis.

 

Firstly, no, they can't do menial jobs, they consistently deviate from the tasks they are performing to go examine some uninteresting piece of litter.

 

Secondly, it's not a mass genocide. There's a difference between the six million people killed in the Holocaust versus the hundred thousand mentally impaired I am talking about.

 

Thirdly, kindly never refer to me as a Nazi again. I'm headed off to Synagogue tomorrow morning to speak about the evils of Joseph Goebbels. I might be authoritarian, I might be far right, but I do NOT appreciate being called a Nazi.

[killerbeer0]

 

Thirdly, kindly never refer to me as a Nazi again. I'm headed off to Synagogue tomorrow morning to speak about the evils of Joseph Goebbels. I might be authoritarian, I might be far right, but I do NOT appreciate being called a Nazi.

 

Then you might want to change your stance a bit. You support Nazi ideals, therefore you are a Nazi. Jew or not.

 

 

 

Honestly it is pathetic that you don't see the disturbing similarity...

[champion]

I believe this should be the mothers' choice. The child won't last long, but at least she's staying positive. And Robert, I have to say, the things you are stating truly sicken me.

[fastortoise]

When the hell is the last time you ever saw someone with Down's Syndrome stimulating our economy?

 

I fail to see how anyone could accept stem cell research and not this. This is killing people today for a better future tomorrow. Eventually we could completely eliminate diseases like Down's Syndrome and Autism.

 

Holy [cabbage] dude, have you any idea of how these things (bolded) work? Read a book or something; lose some of the ignorance that's making these forums go berserk.

[gonpost]

[hide=]

Nobody would ever approve on mass genocide for the "economy", we'd do more damage having no people to grow up to stimulate and preserve the economy.

 

When the hell is the last time you ever saw someone with Down's Syndrome stimulating our economy?

 

I fail to see how anyone could accept stem cell research and not this. This is killing people today for a better future tomorrow. Eventually we could completely eliminate diseases like Down's Syndrome and Autism.

 

 

 

I believe they can actually be taught to do some menial jobs, which in turn help to stimulate the economy.

 

 

 

Name me one exsisting government that will approve your mass genocide, without causing a war.

 

 

 

[bleep] nazis.

 

Firstly, no, they can't do menial jobs, they consistently deviate from the tasks they are performing to go examine some uninteresting piece of litter.

 

Secondly, it's not a mass genocide. There's a difference between the six million people killed in the Holocaust versus the hundred thousand mentally impaired I am talking about.

 

Thirdly, kindly never refer to me as a Nazi again. I'm headed off to Synagogue tomorrow morning to speak about the evils of Joseph Goebbels. I might be authoritarian, I might be far right, but I do NOT appreciate being called a Nazi.

[/hide]

 

 

 

I believe I might be able to solve a few problems here...

 

 

 

Philosophically guys, those of you responding to Robert_de_Sable aren't giving good responses. Calling him any names, saying he makes you sick, etc, will get you no where.

 

 

 

You assume that he might have a point, and then you attack it. Attack it objectively. Attack it without insulting anyone (unless the name describes something and is used not just for egotistical purposes).

 

 

 

Now, he's right that some of the more mentally handicapped do deviate from their jobs or are otherwise incapable of contributing to society. Many of them can, however. There's an obviously [developmentally delayed]ed girl who works at my university's cafeteria cleaning tables. She gets the job done well enough for sure. As for those who cannot contribute to society or to someone beyond themselves, that is no reason to kill them.

 

 

 

To figure out the reason for this, you have to ask yourself "why is it wrong to kill people in the first place". You won't find too many good answers which don't involve God besides one, the argument that you are depriving someone or something of a "valuable future". I'd love to recite all I know to you, but I'm not feeling that motivated. Look up Marquis. He has an article called "Why Abortion is Immoral". I'm not at all concerned with the abortion issue, but I AM concerned with why he asserts that killing someone is morally wrong. That's in the first portion of the essay, I believe.

 

 

 

If you read and reject his idea, just state why, exactly. Then you'll have to offer up your own system of morality (consistent with at least some human intuitions, most likely) which allows for the killing of the mentally [developmentally delayed]ed but not normal people. These things aren't easy to do...but feel free to try, really!

 

 

 

EDIT: Also, as a side point...this is a somewhat off topic branch from the main topic. If anyone still cares about the original issue, feel free to address my earlier post. :D

[WookieeMania12]

 

Secondly, it's not a mass genocide. There's a difference between the six million people killed in the Holocaust versus the hundred thousand mentally impaired I am talking about.

 

 

 

Whether you are referring to mass genocide or a hundred thousand developmentally delayed babies/people, you still have blood on your hands.

 

 

 

Thirdly, kindly never refer to me as a Nazi again. I'm headed off to Synagogue tomorrow morning to speak about the evils of Joseph Goebbels. I might be authoritarian, I might be far right, but I do NOT appreciate being called a Nazi.

 

 

 

While I won't call you a Nazi right now, you seem to support at least one Nazi ideal (killing off mentally ill folk).

[warren211]

Secondly, it's not a mass genocide. There's a difference between the six million people killed in the Holocaust versus the hundred thousand mentally impaired I am talking about.

 

 

 

The Holocaust was not the only genocide that happened in the last century. Rwandan Genocide, Armenian Genocide, both involved the killing that one group of people determined not contributing to their country. And both killed less than 1 million. And there are still others. I find this incredibly ironic that we're nearing the end of Holocaust Awareness month and all active humans look to the future and say "never again" and now we can even suggest the idea of killing hundreds of thousands of people with a disibility just to rid it from the future. Look up Down's syndrome. It's not always an inherited disease. Its Trisomy 21. A mistake in the gene copying where the offspring gets an extra set of chromosome 21. A mutation. It can happen to anyone, even the healthiest parents in the world (although the mother's age has a factor in the chances of Down Syndrome). Even if we killed every human with Down Syndrome on this planet, we'd still have many being born every day and cannot truly eradicate the disease.

[Will H]

Secondly, it's not a mass genocide. There's a difference between the six million people killed in the Holocaust versus the hundred thousand mentally impaired I am talking about.

 

 

 

The Holocaust was not the only genocide that happened in the last century. Rwandan Genocide, Armenian Genocide, both involved the killing that one group of people determined not contributing to their country. And both killed less than 1 million. And there are still others. I find this incredibly ironic that we're nearing the end of Holocaust Awareness month and all active humans look to the future and say "never again" and now we can even suggest the idea of killing hundreds of thousands of people with a disibility just to rid it from the future. Look up Down's syndrome. It's not always an inherited disease. Its Trisomy 21. A mistake in the gene copying where the offspring gets an extra set of chromosome 21. A mutation. It can happen to anyone, even the healthiest parents in the world (although the mother's age has a factor in the chances of Down Syndrome). Even if we killed every human with Down Syndrome on this planet, we'd still have many being born every day and cannot truly eradicate the disease.

 

Warren, you know and I know that there is never such a thing as 'never again' when it comes to humans. Wars will come and go, dangerous ideals will always be thrown around, and people will never live in guaranteed peace. This topic is just the continuation of that pattern. Sorry. :(

 

 

 

You're completely right about Down's Syndome, though, and millions of other inhibitory conditions follow the same pattern. If they didn't, they would have already been removed from the gene pool as Down's Syndrome sufferers could not have lived long enough to reproduce before medicine really took off, and their fertility is severely reduced anyway. Selection pressures don't work because conditions such as this are pressured to avoid the evolutionary system.

[l0l0lpur34]

Nobody would ever approve on mass genocide for the "economy", we'd do more damage having no people to grow up to stimulate and preserve the economy.

 

When the hell is the last time you ever saw someone with Down's Syndrome stimulating our economy?

 

I fail to see how anyone could accept stem cell research and not this. This is killing people today for a better future tomorrow. Eventually we could completely eliminate diseases like Down's Syndrome and Autism.

 

 

 

I believe they can actually be taught to do some menial jobs, which in turn help to stimulate the economy.

 

 

 

Name me one exsisting government that will approve your mass genocide, without causing a war.

 

 

 

[bleep] nazis.

 

Firstly, no, they can't do menial jobs, they consistently deviate from the tasks they are performing to go examine some uninteresting piece of litter.

 

Secondly, it's not a mass genocide. There's a difference between the six million people killed in the Holocaust versus the hundred thousand mentally impaired I am talking about.

 

Thirdly, kindly never refer to me as a Nazi again. I'm headed off to Synagogue tomorrow morning to speak about the evils of Joseph Goebbels. I might be authoritarian, I might be far right, but I do NOT appreciate being called a Nazi.

 

1. Do you even know what autism and downs syndrome are and how they "work"? Even if you killed everyone with it and their whole families today then the number of people being born with it would not change. Also, autism affects different people with it differently - you do know it's speculated that some of the greatest scientists had some form of autism?

 

2. Well you sure seem to support many of their policies.

[How2PK]

I don't think I would keep a kid like that (this probably sounds harsher that I mean it to sound, but hey, I'm not English). If somebody wants to keep that kid, I don't see why not. It's not my business, people should be free to decide what they want to do with it.

 

 

 

What this has got to do with killing people that suffer from the down syndrome is beyond me.

[Kiriyama]

I don't think I would keep a kid like that (this probably sounds harsher that I mean it to sound, but hey, I'm not English). If somebody wants to keep that kid, I don't see why not. It's not my business, people should be free to decide what they want to do with it.

 

 

 

What this has got to do with killing people that suffer from the down syndrome is beyond me.

 

 

 

Honestly, I don't think you sounds harsh at all, not everybody would want to keep a child with this disease knowing it has no future, or even awareness of its surroundings, aside from the basic ones perhaps.

 

 

 

And the reason Down Syndrome got brought in is because someone wants to kill all those with mental handicaps, such as Down Syndrome, to "help" the economy in the future.

[evil_mumm_ra]

if she has she'd be arguing about how we all are bastards and should feel bad for ourselves for suggesting the baby be killed, then she'd stick up for the mother and be like "if that was my baby i'd keep it too! you don't know how it is to be a mother!" etc. personally, i'm indifferent. i just want the baby to die naturally and see the aftermath of that. or even better i'd like to see the baby grow up a few more years and see what the mother is saying when her kid still can't do anything but twitch and use only her life supporting functions.

 

 

 

oh, and btw, this is my first post on this thread. i read like 2 pages, and was linked to the site by faitherooski on msn. i laughed, a lot then decided i didn't really care.

 

 

 

Please don't ever attempt to guess my response again. In fact, don't use my name or refer to me in any of your posts from now on, that would be fantastic :

 

 

 

hey, if that's all you came here to say, then it counts as spam. and judging from your response about kids in general and our confrontations we've had, i'd say my response is pretty accurate. also, i believe i'm very much allowed to guess other people's posts, i didn't put you in a bad light or anything like that. so whatever.

 

 

 

on the topic of the down syndrome bit, i had a cousin with down syndrome, he ended up dying at the age of 16 of leukemia, which wasn't really related to the down syndrome, but he had his moments, i can see how someone with down syndrome could be useful to society, but not anencephaly.

[Kiriyama]

if she has she'd be arguing about how we all are bastards and should feel bad for ourselves for suggesting the baby be killed, then she'd stick up for the mother and be like "if that was my baby i'd keep it too! you don't know how it is to be a mother!" etc. personally, i'm indifferent. i just want the baby to die naturally and see the aftermath of that. or even better i'd like to see the baby grow up a few more years and see what the mother is saying when her kid still can't do anything but twitch and use only her life supporting functions.

 

 

 

oh, and btw, this is my first post on this thread. i read like 2 pages, and was linked to the site by faitherooski on msn. i laughed, a lot then decided i didn't really care.

 

 

 

Please don't ever attempt to guess my response again. In fact, don't use my name or refer to me in any of your posts from now on, that would be fantastic :

 

 

 

hey, if that's all you came here to say, then it counts as spam. and judging from your response about kids in general and our confrontations we've had, i'd say my response is pretty accurate. also, i believe i'm very much allowed to guess other people's posts, i didn't put you in a bad light or anything like that. so whatever.

 

 

 

I think she's more pissed at the fact you assumed you knew what her response would be.

[evil_mumm_ra]

oh i don't doubt it in the least. but it's probably fairly accurate. if she has a problem with it she should have pmed me with it.

[Robert_de_Sable]

 

Thirdly, kindly never refer to me as a Nazi again. I'm headed off to Synagogue tomorrow morning to speak about the evils of Joseph Goebbels. I might be authoritarian, I might be far right, but I do NOT appreciate being called a Nazi.

 

Then you might want to change your stance a bit. You support Nazi ideals, therefore you are a Nazi. Jew or not.

 

 

 

Honestly it is pathetic that you don't see the disturbing similarity...

 

What? That's ludicrous. So anyone who doesn't accept the independence of Israel is Hezbollah or Al-Qaeda? Please.

[Orpheus]

 

Thirdly, kindly never refer to me as a Nazi again. I'm headed off to Synagogue tomorrow morning to speak about the evils of Joseph Goebbels. I might be authoritarian, I might be far right, but I do NOT appreciate being called a Nazi.

 

Then you might want to change your stance a bit. You support Nazi ideals, therefore you are a Nazi. Jew or not.

 

 

 

Honestly it is pathetic that you don't see the disturbing similarity...

 

What? That's ludicrous. So anyone who doesn't accept the independence of Israel is Hezbollah or Al-Qaeda? Please.

 

 

 

Actually, you're pulling a strawman argument. You said that anyone who can't contribute to society should be euthanized, which parallels with Nazism pretty well.

[Robert_de_Sable]

Yes, but just because I support one Nazi ideal doesn't make me a Nazi.

[Kiriyama]

Yes, but just because I support one Nazi ideal doesn't make me a Nazi.

 

 

 

You want to create a superior race by getting rid of those who are mentally handicapped. Honestly, that seems like a major part of being a Nazi.

[venomai]

It is likely... a stressor as big as having a completely nonfunctional child is very likely to cause mental illness of some kind.

 

It's also very likely (if not much more likely) that this stressor alone will not cause a mental illness.

 

 

 

insurance refusing to pay

 

Myah has stated in her blog that Faith has no drug coverage, something which seems to be the most expensive aspect of her medical care.

 

 

 

Delusional individuals, if left alone, can develop schizophrenia (it isn't a guarantee, and my wording was a little too absolute). ... Living in a fabricated reality for very long will have a harmful effect, such as manifestation of progressive mental problems.

 

Bizarre delusions are one of the symptoms of schizophrenia. Arguing that delusions can lead to schizophrenia is like arguing that a runny nose can lead to a cold.

 

 

 

The runny nose leads to a diagnosis of the cold, but it does not lead to the cold. Do you see the difference?

 

 

 

Many mothers of severely disabled children, or for that matter relatives of deep coma/vegetative patients, show signs of what you might call "living in a fabricated reality." They attribute twitches/smile reflexes to something much more significant, they speak as if the individual is conscious and aware, etc. There has been some anecdotal evidence that certain coma patients can hear, but that's besides the point...

 

 

 

Some will come to realize their delusions, others will not. Those that persist with their delusions, though, won't necessarily become 'damaged' because of them.

 

 

 

I also never said she has a pre-existing case of "underlying" schizophrenia

 

Apologies for my poor choice of words. Your implications have been that Myah has a pre-existing vulnerability to schizophrenia -- to the point that such a life event is very likely to trigger it.

 

 

 

"The Stress-Vulnerability Model: [...] it is likely that many aspects of an individual's life are significant in producing psychotic experiences. This idea has been described as the 'stress-vulnerability' model. In the stress-vulnerability model, it is suggested that everybody has a different level of vulnerability to the development of psychotic experiences. People are believed to be more or less vulnerable as a result of both biological factors (which could well be the result of either genetic factors or biological changes following birth) and psychological factors (for instance, being very sensitive - or resilient - to stress in a psychological rather than biological sense). Sensitivity to particular stresses may, of course, be at least partly a result of events that have happened previously in the person's life. [...] vulnerability will result in the development of problems only when environmental stresses are present."

 

http://www.schizophreniaguidelines.co.u ... rapies.php

 

 

 

Since we don't know Myah's biological, psychological or past-life details, it would be futile to try and gauge her vulnerability to schizophrenia.

 

 

 

If you were addressing the risk of schizophrenia under some other model, feel free to correct me.

 

 

 

And lastly, I told you I wasn't trying to diagnose her, I stated twice in my original post that I wasn't

 

You seem intent on analyzing Myah's state of mind and applying a mental disorder to her. It appears that you are indeed attempting to to diagnose her, even if you shy away from using the term itself.

 

 

 

I don't mind speculation, but this is far from it. There's no need to make such blind and unsupported assumptions...

 

 

 

"She is incapable of rationally acting in the interest of her long-term psychological health ..."

 

"it is likely that somewhere there is another, more appropriate, diagnosis ..."

 

etc.

[Zierro]

Yes, but just because I support one Nazi ideal doesn't make me a Nazi.

 

 

 

It just happens to be the biggest one which you support... That's like saying, "I'm not a baker. I only bake bread."

[Robert_de_Sable]

You're all idiots.

 

Eugenics is the elimination of those with genetic defects. While it was a policy employed by the National Socialist Party of German Workers, it is entirely different from killing off a rather large race of people because you dislike them.

[Zierro]

You're all idiots.

 

Eugenics is the elimination of those with genetic defects. While it was a policy employed by the National Socialist Party of German Workers, it is entirely different from killing off a rather large race of people because you dislike them.

 

 

 

They didn't just dislike them. They had "rational explanations" of how the world would be a better place without them, much like you do.

[Robert_de_Sable]

No, the Nazis believed the Jews were secretly waging a war against them. To paraphrase a quote from Adolph Hitler "Moscow is run by a bunch of Jewish, Bolshevik wire-pullers."

 

They didn't just believe that the world would be a better place, they believed it would be a perfect, Aryan-led Germanic nation. I believe that a world without these genetic diseases a healthier world. Care to argue?