Heartland

Clicky

Poor bastard. That must be the hardest thing to have to do. I'm just glad the courts cleared him.

Hhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmm. I dunno. Murder is murder.

"At that point there was hope, there was a future."

But all hope was quickly dashed. Next morning they found their daughter had the brain of a 13-week-old foetus. She would never walk, talk or develop any further.

The man would later tell a friend that it was so bad "if she was a dog you'd put her down".

jesus. the poor family

Oh don't get me wrong. I think it's terrible and I do feel incredibly sorry for the family. BUT euthanasia IS illegal in this country. Personally, I don't think that was the right thing to do.

Sexygothâ„¢ wrote:euthanasia IS illegal in this country

True. This was New Zealand though; I don't know the legal situation over there. IMO it doesn't really matter; I don't know whether I think he did the right thing or not. I guess it's the kind of decision you can't anticipate.

I'm glad they didn't convict him though, just out of compassion.

Very sticky ground, but the correct decision. I've seen too many tiny babies become less alive (more dead) by the day while on ECMOs and other 'life-preserving' equipment; their families desperate to let their kids suffering end, and some f**kwitted quack refusing to turn the machines off because 'he knew best'.

markfiend wrote:

Sexygothâ„¢ wrote:euthanasia IS illegal in this country

True. This was New Zealand though; I don't know the legal situation over there. IMO it doesn't really matter; I don't know whether I think he did the right thing or not. I guess it's the kind of decision you can't anticipate.

I'm glad they didn't convict him though, just out of compassion.

it would appear that it is illegal

but surely the best thing here would have just been to let the poor mite die naturally. i'm no doctor but i'm guessing a baby with such a chronically under-developed brain wouldn't have had a particularly long life anyway?

FFS Dave wrote:Very sticky ground, but the correct decision. I've seen too many tiny babies become less alive (more dead) by the day while on ECMOs and other 'life-preserving' equipment; their families desperate to let their kids suffering end, and some f**kwitted quack refusing to turn the machines off because 'he knew best'.

I have very mixed feelings about this -after reading the article.
My friend had a baby boy, Michael, about six years ago. Her pregnancy was normal, she was a very healthy person and there was no history of severe complications or birth abnormalities in her family. The baby was born blind, with a cleft palate, only half a functioning brain, hole in the heart and spina bifida, as well as epilepsy. By the age of three, he resembled a 18 month old baby. He had other complications besides those I've mentioned above but throughout all this, his spirit would not give in. I held him several times whenever I went to visit my friends' mother, who helped a great deal in looking after her grandson. He was not able to communicate verbally, as he was also dumb and was crippled in one arm. His legs had to be mounted onto a kind of forked splint, in order to keep his muscles from withering away and he had to have constant physiotherapy. The last time I saw Michael, he was about 4 and was still in a very pathetic way but he had managed to learn basic sign language and had a unique way of communicating with his immediate family. He was able to smile (although something like a grimace) and laugh to a degree that was disturbing and exciting all at the same time. I was horrified by his condition the very first time I saw him but felt so much love and admiration for him after spending time with him and his family over the years. He is now in a "home" for children with special needs and his mother is pregnant again, this time we believe her unborn foetus is perfect. I don't know whether it would have been better to "pull the plug" on him in the hospital, I'm sure this crossed his parents' minds several times and it is a subject that I felt I wasn't qualified to ask them. They have given him so much love and he has survived, we don't know how long for but at least, while he is on this Earth there are people who will make sure that he has the best possible care and that his development as a human being is stimulated to the best of both his ability and theirs.

For myself, I don't know what I'd do. I suppose it "all depends" on lots of things.

I do know I feel desperately sorry for that family. Regarding the legal decision, I'm glad he was acquitted, as what useful purpose would it have served to find him guilty? Was it murder? I don't think so. Murder is about hatred and power. I think he loved her, couldn't let her suffer anymore, and who knows, perhaps her little soul will have a better chance next time round?

Illegal is not necessarily the same as wrong.

A heartwrenching situation but by the sound of things an enlightened jury.

re Lucretia's point, and I really don't want to be personal about your friends....that child is in a home but they're going to have a 'normal' one this time.

Hmm.

I'll stop right there I think.

Mrs. Snowey wrote:I think he loved her, couldn't let her suffer anymore, and who knows, perhaps her little soul will have a better chance next time round?

hmmm... but she had the brain of a thirteen week old foetus and a thirteen week old foetus doesn't feel pain does it? it can't do becuase otherwise we're causing suffering on a massive scale everyday by killing those same thirteen week old (and older) foetuses in abortion clinics all over the world....

straylight wrote:Illegal is not necessarily the same as wrong.

A heartwrenching situation but by the sound of things an enlightened jury.

re Lucretia's point, and I really don't want to be personal about your friends....that child is in a home but they're going to have a 'normal' one this time.

Hmm.

I'll stop right there I think.

It's impossible on a page such as this to go into all the history behind Michael's condition and the decisions taken by his parents - I feel the same as you do, believe me, to a point and I was also very cynical when I found out that they were having to put him into special care. However, it is impossible for them, at this point, to care for him at home, such is the nature of his debilities. He needs, nay demands!, 24 hour specialist care and attention. But for all that, he is still loved for the person that he is by his family and they have told me on many occasions that their lives have been richer for having him there with them.

Like I said, I have extremely mixed feelings about this. I have children of my own and am now expecting my first grandchild (who I saw yesterday for the first time on a scan - 12 weeks old and already a perfect miniature human being) ... so I know the fears a person has when a baby is on the way and the complicatoins that can happen later.

I feel for the parents of the child in this story but personally, I don't think I could have taken such a drastic step, it is a "there for the grace of God, go I" kind of thing. You just hope to God (or whoever you have any faith in) that this scenario never happens to you or your immediate loved ones.

RicheyJames wrote:

Mrs. Snowey wrote:I think he loved her, couldn't let her suffer anymore, and who knows, perhaps her little soul will have a better chance next time round?

hmmm... but she had the brain of a thirteen week old foetus and a thirteen week old foetus doesn't feel pain does it? it can't do becuase otherwise we're causing suffering on a massive scale everyday by killing those same thirteen week old (and older) foetuses in abortion clinics all over the world....

I suspect that the journalist is hugely dumbing-down the complete medical diagnosis into quotable soundbites, as they tend to do, and I don't think we can draw accurate parallels because of that.

lazarus corporation wrote:

RicheyJames wrote:

Mrs. Snowey wrote:I think he loved her, couldn't let her suffer anymore, and who knows, perhaps her little soul will have a better chance next time round?

hmmm... but she had the brain of a thirteen week old foetus and a thirteen week old foetus doesn't feel pain does it? it can't do becuase otherwise we're causing suffering on a massive scale everyday by killing those same thirteen week old (and older) foetuses in abortion clinics all over the world....

I suspect that the journalist is hugely dumbing-down the complete medical diagnosis into quotable soundbites, as they tend to do, and I don't think we can draw accurate parallels because of that.

True. All we can really do is give thanks that we don't have to face something like that. And hope we never have to.

@RJ : Suffering doesn't neccesarily have to equate with pain. Even if one is watching Killing Miranda

I've read a doctor's opinion (on another forum where I found this link) that what the father did in this case was analogous to turning off the life-support of someone who is in persistent vegetative case. (Obviously a "second-hand" opinion in that the doctor concerned was not directly familiar with the medical history of the child.)

Not that it makes that much difference I suppose.

I can understand the father and I think I'd do the same, although to take the decision must be much easier than to actually do it and find enough courage to live on with it. Reading the article, I wish euthanasia was legal all over the world. It's not just life that matters, it's the quality of it, and no one has a chance to live forever anyway so sometimes it's really better to cut it short.

_emma_ wrote:I can understand the father and I think I'd do the same, although to take the decision must be much easier than to actually do it and find enough courage to live on with it. Reading the article, I wish euthanasia was legal all over the world. It's not just life that matters, it's the quality of it, and no one has a chance to live forever anyway so sometimes it's really better to cut it short.

I agree with you.

And I have 3 kids. Thank God (or what you believe in) they're all healthy.

But where do we draw the line? I've every sympathy with the family in this situation. You can't imagine how much I'd hate to be put there myself, or see anyone I cared about trying to deal with this sort of thing - it must be unbearable.

But, in crude terms, how defective does a child need to be before a parent has the right to kill it? The mental capacity of a 13-week-old foetus is (presumably) an extreme example. Suppose the child was "merely" severely mentally handicapped? Would that be grounds for killing him/her?

How about moderately mentally ill, with additional physical disabilities? Or just a bit funny-looking?

It's an impossible legal conundrum. On the one hand we have a case like this, but in recent months in the UK there have been two cases of families desperately pleading in court for their seriously ill children to continue to receive treatment against medical opinion which concluded treatment should cease.

In brief it seems that whatever legislation is created, it will bring as much anguish as solace. And yet the current situation, putting cases like this before an unpredictable jury, risks convicting people like the father in NZ.

For once I've no idea how to square this particular circle - any other takers?

andymackem wrote:But where do we draw the line?

We don't draw it, we're just sometimes driven at it.

_emma_ wrote:I can understand the father and I think I'd do the same, although to take the decision must be much easier than to actually do it and find enough courage to live on with it. Reading the article, I wish euthanasia was legal all over the world. It's not just life that matters, it's the quality of it, and no one has a chance to live forever anyway so sometimes it's really better to cut it short.

So you could kill your child but you mourn flowers and insects??

Sexygothâ„¢ wrote:

_emma_ wrote:I can understand the father and I think I'd do the same, although to take the decision must be much easier than to actually do it and find enough courage to live on with it. Reading the article, I wish euthanasia was legal all over the world. It's not just life that matters, it's the quality of it, and no one has a chance to live forever anyway so sometimes it's really better to cut it short.

So you could kill your child but you mourn flowers and insects??

Somehow I knew you'd ask that question and the answer is kind of yes. I think sometimes the only solution is to end the suffering in such a way, be it an insect or a human being. As for the hypothetic child in question - did I say I wouldn't mourn it?

_emma_ wrote:

Sexygothâ„¢ wrote:

_emma_ wrote:I can understand the father and I think I'd do the same, although to take the decision must be much easier than to actually do it and find enough courage to live on with it. Reading the article, I wish euthanasia was legal all over the world. It's not just life that matters, it's the quality of it, and no one has a chance to live forever anyway so sometimes it's really better to cut it short.

So you could kill your child but you mourn flowers and insects??

Somehow I knew you'd ask that question and the answer is kind of yes. I think sometimes the only solution is to end the suffering in such a way, be it an insect or a human being. As for the hypothetic child in question - did I say I wouldn't mourn it?

I agrea with you.
but, I find the fathers actions to impulsive. you might say he did the right thing to do. but when he did it he was 'as I can understand' in no controll over his emotions.
and this it the reason I don't agrea with his actions.
in this case it he was problably right but there are so many oter situations he would not be.
sometimes people have to be protected against there own feelings.

You are very smart as for your age Christophe. Honestly.