Anoushik Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Ok, there's something I've been thinking about a lot lately that I can't come to a definite conclusion in my mind. (A couple of years ago I was more sure of this.) It has to do with abortion, but not just a regular abortion. Let's say that the woman is pregnant and suddenly through testing the doctors find that the baby has major birth defects. It's the kind that in the past the child wouldn't even have survived, but because of modern medicine the baby survives, even if it means being mentally retarded, being crippled, having to spent most of his time in hospitals. Should the woman get an abortion? Should the child be killed so that he/she won't have to live a life in misery or should the child live because everyone has the right to live? What situation would be in the best interest of the child? I hope my question is clear. I'm don't want to start a debate about abortion from the woman's perspective, but this is more like from the child's perspective. Please, tell me in this case what do you think is ethically the right thing to do? (I used to think that if it was my child, I know that I wouldn't want to see my baby suffer throughout his life, but now I'm not so sure anymore.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 The child doesn't have a perspective. It's too stupid to have a perspective. You take it out of the womb and set it on a table ... if it can survive on it's own for more than a few minutes, then it has a right to have it's own perspective. Other than that, it's the choice of the person who is going to take care of AND fit the bill for that pile of goo. If that kid is going to be born and be a drain on the society and the medical and welfare system that I also have to pay for through my taxes and what not, then I say put the poor thing to rest and try again. Babies are dime-a-dosen .... Worthwhile humans are much more rare to find. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armat Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Babies are dime-a-dosen .... Worthwhile humans are much more rare to find. Sip ... so is this person was worth to live? Stephen William Hawking, born January 8, 1942, Oxford, England, is one of the leading theoretical physicists in the world. He has been compared to Isaac Newton by some observers. Hawking is Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge University (a post once held by Isaac Newton). His principal areas of research are cosmology and quantum gravity. One of his major contributions to the field of research were his papers on the relationship between black holes and thermodynamics. He only can move his eyes!!! The question is who the $#%^ are we to decide!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Yah ... so we abort a few Hawkings here and there ... there will always be exceptions but we can't just sit here with our thumbs up our arses hoping that every kid with severe birth defects is going to turn out to be a steven hawking. I also read about this lady that put a quarter in the machine in Vegas and won 9 Million the other day ... but you don't see me running down there to stick my hard earned cash into those machines. The point is, we can sit and wonder and wait for "luck" ... but I think things will go much better if we play the odds right Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyebruin Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 the bigger question is why has God chosen for that particular woman or child to go through that experience...one can deny going through it by an abortion which is something most people or many? will choose to do... the burden is not so much on the society as it is on the poor kid and his/her family or caretakers...sure, a certian % of tax$ goes for these types of programs but it's not the taxpayers who have to deal with the reality of it everyday!! if that soul was meant to experience life on earth, you might be putting him at a disadvantage and eliminate his opportunity to balance out his karma through living a disabled life for a number of years or however many... if you choose to abort, the soul might choose to incarnate again as a crippled individual until his karmic debt is paid in full...only, this time it might be with another family or perhaps with the same one depending now on the family's lesson(s) to be learned from this experience...if life is chosen, however, then in the next lifetime perhaps the karmic slate would be clean and the soul might get to live a healthy and normal life... what surprises me more than anything is when people blindly and ignorantly say "what has the poor baby done to be born like that?" it might be a baby at this stage, however the soul is ageless and whatever particular defects it chose to be born with is a reflection of the soul's past transgressions! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 the bigger question is why has God chosen for that particular woman or child to go through that experience...... interestingly enough, that question has NEVER crossed my mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyebruin Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 (edited) interestingly enough, that question has NEVER crossed my mind. uhhh yaaaa!!! something to think about eh? Edited January 19, 2004 by hyebruin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armat Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 (edited) Anoushik in essence your question is a real tough one.I can't say since I have not been there but there is that chance that doctors could be wrong. If the baby is truly brain dead then his existance would only bring much more suffering to all around but if the brain is alive and healthy then the physical shortcomings can be overcome. Edited January 19, 2004 by Armat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 (edited) Let's say that the woman is pregnant and suddenly through testing the doctors find that the baby has major birth defects. It's the kind that in the past the child wouldn't even have survived, but because of modern medicine the baby survives, even if it means being mentally retarded, being crippled, having to spent most of his time in hospitals. Should the woman get an abortion? Should the child be killed so that he/she won't have to live a life in misery or should the child live because everyone has the right to live? What situation would be in the best interest of the child? there would be no "best interest" when you've killed the child.... best interest is for those who are still alive, not those who are dead. i am undecided on the issue of abortion (although i lean towards pro-choice rather than pro-life). and i don't know much about birth defects except for watching the story of a little girl who had birth defects (i saw it on TV -- it was a long ad calling for donations to the Hospital for Sick Children), and i must admit that if she were my child, i would've preferred that she hadn't been born. of course, a child who is mentally disabled or not fully developed mentally would not really understand his/her position, but for those around the child, the parents, relatives, etc., it's a very tough and emotionally draining situation.. and i do feel for them. and had that child been mine, i would've preferred abortion to years of torture. i think it's all a matter of conscience, not right or wrong. personally, i would not be as traumatised if the child was killed (abortion) before being born (i.e. before i got to know it).. it's the social aspect that is traumatising, more than the "natural instict" of parenthood. because otherwise, people would be unable to get over their child's death/loss.. people learn to adapt to situations.. i guess in a way i'm selfish (not wanting to go through all that pain of seeing the child going through that pain), but looking at it from the child's perspective -- the child does not know the meaning of life, the value of it, the "good" part of it, because he/she has not experienced it yet.. if i were born with a birth defect (let's say physical), and i grew up like that, and i was asked whether or not i thought it was a good decision that my mom made (not to go through an abortion) [not talking about right or wrong here, just good and bad], i would've said no. i don't think i would want to live my life with a birth defect. i don't think anyone does. and i guess that's where people's evaluation of life comes into play -- how much they value life and accept their situation. i personally wouldn't accept it. seriously -- i would probably end up committing suicide as a grown up. just being honest here... i realise that's extreme, but that's my view... Edited January 19, 2004 by Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Sip ... so is this person was worth to live? Stephen William Hawking, born January 8, 1942, Oxford, England, is one of the leading theoretical physicists in the world. He has been compared to Isaac Newton by some observers. Hawking is Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge University (a post once held by Isaac Newton). His principal areas of research are cosmology and quantum gravity. One of his major contributions to the field of research were his papers on the relationship between black holes and thermodynamics. He only can move his eyes!!! The question is who the $#%^ are we to decide!!! Stephen Hawking became ill in about the age of 28-30, anushing question is deferent in nature Armat I agree with Sip, why have go thru misery and pain for the rest of your life, I have a friend whose baby was born like that, handicap (mentally and physically), and every time they ( the parents ) wished they were smart to know in advance what was wrong and could have prevented it. speaking as a parent, we have a healthy son, and if we knew (and we did tests before he was born) in advance he was not going to be ok then yes, we would have terminated the pregnancy, think about it, what good would have come out of it, at list for my friend, poor couple are domed for the rest of there lives. Anyways this subject is sensitive for debate I will stop here for now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accelerated Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 abort it - no question about it, the child is most likelly to be a drain on the parents/relatives, society, government etc - not to mention lead a miserable and unfullfiled 'life'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 (edited) The question is who the $#%^ are we to decide!!! And the answer is, we are the parents, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, grandparents, relatives, friends, doctors, nurses, hospitals, governments, and most importantly caring people, who want the best for the child that's being formed in the womb, and living a miserable life does not seem to me "in the best interest of the child", let alone the parents who have to live through the suffering for the rest of their lives, and the thousands of dollars spent by the family and society in care and treatments, the emotional damage, etc. I say, just abort it and be done -- it probably won't feel anything if it's done early enough, and it won't damage/ruin lives as much as it would if it were left to be born.. Responsiblity does not always mean preserving life. Unfortunately, sometimes it means putting an end to it. Edited January 19, 2004 by Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 I have to agree with Hyebruin and Armat. Very well explained Bruinchik... I would like to add - there is always a chance to have a child like that, so before you plan to have a child think about it, not when there is already a pregnancy. Another thing, when people decide to have a child they never ask the government, the taxpayers, the nurses, the hospitals, relatives, etc... they never ask anyone's agreement, right? They just want to have a child. But as soon as there is a question of the child being undesirable all of a sudden the taxpayers, the government, the hospitals, etc... become important. Don't you think something is wrong with this thinking? When people want to have a child they never think that the child would actually mind being born even if it was a perfectly healthy child. But as soon as they are faced with a crippled child they start to think about how the child would feel. Maybe they are lying to themselves, I suspect they just think about their lives not about the child that has not been born yet. Well, I think it is wrong. Since you have decided to have a child for yor own selfish reasons, then let it be born and enjoy or suffer the consequences on your own as it will turn out I am against abortion anyway, so this is just another instance to say it is wrong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Another thing, when people decide to have a child they never ask the government, the taxpayers, the nurses, the hospitals, relatives, etc... they never ask anyone's agreement, right? They just want to have a child. But as soon as there is a question of the child being undesirable all of a sudden the taxpayers, the government, the hospitals, etc... become important. Don't you think something is wrong with this thinking? no, that is because they are assuming the child will be normal and will function well in society and fullfil his/her role and carry out his/her duties/responsibilities and take care of his/her parents in old age, etc. it's strictly from a utilitarian point of view. because if it weren't, people would not have such huge problems with children "deserting" their parents after they grew up or with homosexuality (the problem of not being able to have kids), etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 But as soon as they are faced with a crippled child they start to think about how the child would feel. not really.. not all of it is about how the child would feel if it's crippled. it's mostly about how the parents would feel and how they will be able to get on with their lives.. because if people started thinking about the child and what's REALLY best for it/him/her, they would not be so selfish and so dogmatic, even the most religious of them (who believes abortion is a sin or whatever).. not to mention the selfishness of the argument "you can't kill yourself, think about how sad your parents will be if you do." well, my parents didn't think how sad i was gonna be when they brought me to life, so why should i think about how sad they're gonna be when i leave? i don't know if i'm contradicting myself here.. i hope i'm not.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 no, that is because they are assuming the child will be normal and will function well in society and fullfil his/her role and carry out his/her duties/responsibilities and take care of his/her parents in old age, etc. it's strictly from a utilitarian point of view. because if it weren't, people would not have such huge problems with children "deserting" their parents after they grew up or with homosexuality (the problem of not being able to have kids), etc. yes, but utilitarian thinking is wrong in my mind. at any rate, to claim that they care about the child in such a case is hypocritical don't you think? and why do they have to assume where there is clearly a risk of the child being not normal - that's irrational. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Sasun are you against tests as well? let me ask you a personal question please, your wife is pregnant 4 weeks or 6, and there are wide range of tests to be done to determine if the baby is normal/healthy, and tests come back positive (not normal) means baby is going to be spending rest of his/her life handicapped and mentally retard state, not to mention your sufferings what action would you take in that case, I think my question is valid and interesting to know what your answer is going to be. And don’t you think abortion in this case would be the most humane thing to do? Sorry for being so blunt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Sasun are you against tests as well? let me ask you a personal question please, your wife is pregnant 4 weeks or 6, and there are wide range of tests to be done to determine if the baby is normal/healthy, and tests come back positive (not normal) means baby is going to be spending rest of his/her life handicapped and mentally retard state, not to mention your sufferings what action would you take in that case, I think my question is valid and interesting to know what your answer is going to be. And don’t you think abortion in this case would be the most humane thing to do? Sorry for being so blunt Edo jan, you are asking a difficult question. I don't imagine that situation, I mean of course I understand but I am not sure what feelings I would have in that case because I never had a child and I am not familiar with parental feelings. I think I would not do abortion anyway. But suppose I felt pity for the child or for my selfish reasons I did abortion. It is still wrong, and I think that I would much regret through the rest of my life. So the chances are I would think well ahead and not do abortion. I would just consider that's the best I could do in my life and take care of the child no matter how hard it is physically and emotionally. After all its not the end of the world. Some people volunteer to take care of disabled children and they feel quite happy. How am I better than them? That would be more preferrable than suffer from guilty conscience that I did abortion - that's not something you can turn back. But you never know, its an ethical dilemma and no matter how convinced we are we always allow at least 0.00001% chance of being mistaken. So today I think that abortion is wrong but that maynot be the case if I ever have to face the fact myself. That's what I honestly think, it is easy to say so theoretically but not as easy to stand for your word Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gevo27 Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Sip and Edo jan, i think you guys are out of line on this one, you say in way to dry a manner to forget the baby. The baby, though not capable of making its own decision wants to survive, because once its outta the womb, its looking for something to suck, to feed itself... Someone i studied in philosophy (( ill find his namne later)) argued very well and convincingly that life is made of experiances, and abortion is taking away the experiances of the baby, in other words, the baby has potential for good experiances in whic he enjoys blha blah blha... for this case, the baby, if it infact survives thorugh its toddler years, has potential for most all good experiances we enjoy today, and have enjoyed all through our lives.. The most inportant experiance in ones life is to experiance love, love is the ultimate experiance in life, and to abort the child would be to deprive it of its potential experiances which in fact he will have if he survives , of love... what you edo hopar jan, and sip are suggesting is to get rid of it as it is an incumbrance to this world... well there are many many people who are ill today, mentally and physically, some born with it and some who through some unfortunate circumstances came to it in there lives.... would it be right to say that lets abort these people too, i mean they are an anoynce to society, they cant do anythign on there own........???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gevo27 Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Accelerated Posted on Jan 18 2004, 09:03 PM abort it - no question about it, the child is most likelly to be a drain on the parents/relatives, society, government etc - not to mention lead a miserable and unfullfiled 'life'. thats very sad accelerated,, imagine urself getting hit by a truck, and only thing that is alive is half of your brain,,, just enough to make u considered a human being, but not enough for anything else... you can feel the love of ur parents still, u love back, but u cannot speak understandable words, you can aknowledge care, but you dont understand why they not understand you!??? would you like ur parents to walk in the rooms, talk with the doctors infront of you and say.. Kill "it" its a drain on our income, and its gonna be miserable for the rest of its life anyways.... TRUST ME U WONT WANNA DIE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted January 19, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 imagine urself getting hit by a truck, and only thing that is alive is half of your brain,,, just enough to make u considered a human being, but not enough for anything else... you can feel the love of ur parents still, u love back, but u cannot speak understandable words, you can aknowledge care, but you dont understand why they not understand you!??? would you like ur parents to walk in the rooms, talk with the doctors infront of you and say.. If I was in that situation you've described, I'd want to die. Why would anyone want to live in that situation? I, an intelligent being, have been given a body and the ablility to communicate/share my thoughts and feelings. If I am deprived of that, what else is there for me left to live for? This reminds me of the Florida woman who made headlines this summer - she had been in a vegetative state for about ten years since suffering a stroke and part of her family wanted her life support to be disconnected so she could finally die, and the other family members wanted her to be kept like that. I often thought about her and came to the conclusion that I better start telling my family if something like this happened to me, they shouldn't even think about putting me in life support. (Of course, being a tough topic, my mom didn't want me to go on with the subject.) I think it's degrading for a person, who has lead a very normal life, to just be in that position and the whole world sees you like that - with the mouth open, head tilted, eyes wandering all over the place. (I saw a picture of this woman before she had the stroke and she was very beautiful. Unfortunately, since most media only showed pictures of her current status, that's the only image comes to mind when I think of her.) It's a very horrific tragedy to happen to someone, but if this happens to me, I'll choose death. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted January 19, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Dan, I feel exactly like you regarding this topic. I know that I if I was born with a birth defect and had the ablility to understand what life is and what this world means, I would've chosen to wish that I had never been born in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyebruin Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 thats very sad accelerated,, imagine urself getting hit by a truck, and only thing that is alive is half of your brain,,, just enough to make u considered a human being, but not enough for anything else... you can feel the love of ur parents still, u love back, but u cannot speak understandable words, you can aknowledge care, but you dont understand why they not understand you!??? would you like ur parents to walk in the rooms, talk with the doctors infront of you and say.. Kill "it" its a drain on our income, and its gonna be miserable for the rest of its life anyways.... TRUST ME U WONT WANNA DIE! gevo jan, very impressed with your wisdom especially at such young age!! very touching! if only more earthlings felt and knew the impact of their thoughts and actions!!!... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted January 19, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 what surprises me more than anything is when people blindly and ignorantly say "what has the poor baby done to be born like that?" it might be a baby at this stage, however the soul is ageless and whatever particular defects it chose to be born with is a reflection of the soul's past transgressions! Similarly, Hyebruin, I am surprized to hear that the soul has "past transgressions" and it has to overcome this by suffering in this material world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shiner Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 I think the child doesn't get absolutely anything out of life in the situation described. I don't think Hawking's condition is similar at all. He has Lou Gehrig's disease. This is something you are diagnosed with in adulthood and then gradually deteriorate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.