(May 22, 2012 at 3:47 pm)RaphielDrake Wrote: er... Shell... it had half its head missing and had about eight hours to live once it was born.
Thats a pretty valid reason.

Even though I agree with you Raph, I can never judge the mother who wants to spend all the time she can with her child, even though she knows it's gonna die in a matter of moments. But when you make a circus out of it.. *grumble*

Exactly...she wants to be a billboard for how fucking holy she is.

(May 22, 2012 at 3:47 pm)RaphielDrake Wrote: er... Shell... it had half its head missing and had about eight hours to live once it was born.
Thats a pretty valid reason.
If that kid had been able to hold a sentient thought in its head and voice it I'm pretty sure it would of agreed, I don't know a single sane person who would want to be vegitablized and then subjected to... that.

We don't disagree. I didn't say that wasn't a valid reason. Pain isn't.

I think she meant that saying it would feel pain wasn't valid because it wouldn't feel anything, not that nothing about the situation was a valid cause to abort.


Personally, I would have aborted. I couldn't handle birthing a child to have it die in my arms.

(May 22, 2012 at 4:29 pm)Shell B Wrote:

(May 22, 2012 at 3:47 pm)RaphielDrake Wrote: er... Shell... it had half its head missing and had about eight hours to live once it was born.
Thats a pretty valid reason.
If that kid had been able to hold a sentient thought in its head and voice it I'm pretty sure it would of agreed, I don't know a single sane person who would want to be vegitablized and then subjected to... that.

We don't disagree. I didn't say that wasn't a valid reason. Pain isn't.

Fair enough, you're right.

According to this woman's blog, God had a plan for Grayson all along. The boy was meant to die so that the world would learn about anencephaly. This was accomplished through Facebook banning her from posting her son's picture, followed by the viral outcry on social media sites. So, am I right in thinking that God done all this just to make us aware of a birth defect, which God created in the first place? I don't know about the rest of you, but I'd call that boasting.

I guess it brings her comfort though, so who am I to judge her? As for the decision to go through with the pregnancy in the first place, I really can't condemn her for that either. Maybe I missed it, but did anyone post references to where she made money from the story? I know how she could; I'm just not going to assume that she did. It's for that reason that I can't really comment on her motives.

I've heard about so many of these cases and read quite a few news articles on the subject and am now seeing several YouTube videos about it. The more recent one depicting a child with anencephaly that recently turned 2. This child is being kept alive with numerous drugs and constant doctor's visits. They call this child a "miracle" baby.

I've debated this topic in one of my philosophy classes a couple years ago. I had a long winded argument against keeping babies with anencephaly alive if the mother knows well in advance. Most of the class was against me and I asked them what it means to be human. Most replied with what basically amounted to a baby with motor functions. Now I'm sure all of us know by now that the brain stem controls our basic motor functions. There is no thought behind it.

My main point that I made after that was:

If you are going to suggest that a human shell without a brain is still a human because the basic motor functions show that it is organic and alive, I would ask all of you what you consider the trees right outside the window to be. As these trees can do more than this baby who was supposed to be human. The trees can grow, reproduce, and thrive for a long period of time. Yet, the trees have no thought processes either. Technically speaking, your definition of "human" allows me to say that these trees are more than human.

I offended some obviously, but they got the point since no one rebutted. I'm not trying to be harsh here. I think it supremely selfish of a mother to choose to birth a child that will without a doubt be born without a brain. As a parent myself, I cannot imagine how difficult this would be for me. However, it would hurt unfathomably more to see my child in this state being kept alive with a slew of drugs.

Gringo, yeah, I didn't see a damn thing about money, either, but maybe she was making money. I just don't see it.

---

Oh, I see. They were looking for money to pay for the hospital stay and funeral costs. Not unheard of, but kind of tasteless when you look at how clearly not broke they are.

(May 22, 2012 at 6:14 pm)NoahsFarce Wrote: The more recent one depicting a child with anencephaly that recently turned 2.

4, Check Nicholas's birthday.

She only had a few hours to be with her child and hold him in her arms, of course she wants to have pictures to remember him by. Thats not exploitation.

I agree that you don't need to be a Christian to understand You just need to have a modicum of empathy for a woman who lost her son instead of getting on some indignant rant about how dare she be religious and post pictures of her child and all that.

Its also worth noting that facebook has apologized for removing pictures of her son, and claims that they did so in error.

Since we are both Christians, I hope it is not being too presumptuous of me to say that I hope Heather can draw inspiration from another woman who stood by her dying son until the very end.