Abortion -cpr on the fetus?

[brewer]

mh.brewer,
A woman should know if she is capable of carrying.

What is nonviable fetus? If it lives by is own accord with sustinance it is alive.

To pick and choose lives is wrong. The mother should accept a possibility of death and make her desision accordingly.

Nonviable fetus is one that can't survive outside the womb.

How can a woman possibly know if she is medically capable until going through the pregnancy? Often it is not until pregnancy that life threatening complications are discovered or develope. Death does not only occur during the birthing process when the fetus is viable. The threat to the mothers life may occur at the stage when the child is not viable. So by your logic both should die? You seem to be willing to pick and choose the mothers and possibly the child's life. About what I expected.

New I'd regret this!

[Ravenshire]

@rex I don't care what you do or don't believe about me. I am not giving an arguement from authority, I'm merely presenting my credentials to refute someone who did not have a firm grasp on embryology.  However my facts stand on their own merit, try to address those rahter then an unfounded ad-homin attack.

The fuck you aren't.

You sir or madam do not know what you are talking about. Between the 2 of us, one of us has an MD. It's not you. Additionally I agree that neuronal development accelerates at 28 weeks, but that does NOT mean that it hasn't already stated. Premature infants are born at < 28 weeks and survive. Some are developmentally delayed, but that is irrelevant to the moral discussion. You are now going into the territory of determining a worthwhile life and that is a different slippery slope. My question was primarily of survival. By the way, I have personally cared for an infant born at 24 weeks due to medical complication /emergency (ecclampsia) she had a Rough initial road but is a very happy 9 year old now.
Again, stick to what you know (it ain't biology) and talk about the morality of allowing a living fetus to die outside the body of another without medical support that isnknown and available. You still haven't given a good Moral arguement for this.

(emphasis is mine)

You clearly point out that you're opinion is superior because of your alleged education. Time to put up or shut the fuck up.

[answer-is-42]

@Cato. You're graph showed a non zero denominator in survival at <20 weeks, therefor there is a possibly of survival. No one denies the rate of survival increases with gestation and size, that's not the point. The point is that there is a non-zero chance of survival (the medical definition of futility is that there is no reasonable of survival ) patient with cardiogenic shock and multi system organ failure have a very low chance of survival and we do talk with the patient about withdrawal of care, but we do not simply turn it off or not bother to try because they are likely to die

[popsthebuilder]

mh.brewer,
A woman should know if she is capable of carrying.

What is nonviable fetus? If it lives by is own accord with sustinance it is alive.

To pick and choose lives is wrong. The mother should accept a possibility of death and make her desision accordingly.

Nonviable fetus is one that can't survive outside the womb.

How can a woman possibly know if she is medically capable until going through the pregnancy? Often it is not until pregnancy that life threatening complications are discovered or develope. Death does not only occur during the birthing process when the fetus is viable. The threat to the mothers life may occur at the stage when the child is not viable. So by your logic both should die? You seem to be willing to pick and choose the mothers and possibly the child's life. About what I expected.

New I'd regret this!

What do you mean at a stage where life is not viable. A mother should understand the dangers of giving life. If there is an actual dead fetus inside the womb then of course save the woman. If the baby can't be saved, save the woman. Life and death are natural. To selfishly choose one or the other is wrong. Innocent, pure potential comes before sinners who knowingly bring offspring into shitty existence as far as I'm concerned.

[rexbeccarox]

Good thing it doesn't concern you, then, pops.

[Ravenshire]

@Cato. You're graph showed a non zero denominator in survival at <20 weeks, therefor there is a possibly of survival. No one denies the rate of survival increases with gestation and size, that's not the point.

Well, I'm not CATO, but you did tell me to get some different arguments, after I already had, then proceeded to ignore them. Who the fuck are you to decide for mother what she will or will not have to deal with for the rest of her life. Are you going to provide financial assistance to those who are too damned poor to feed another mouth? Will you provide protection from the abusive spouse/father. How about medical assistance for those genetic disorder that do nothing but cause suffering and end the child's life very early.

The point is that there is a non-zero chance of survival (the medical definition of futility is that there is no reasonable of survival ) patient with cardiogenic shock and multi system organ failure have a very low chance of survival and we do talk with the patient about withdrawal of care, but we do not simply turn it off or not bother to try because they are likely to die

False analogy.

[answer-is-42]

@rex how about you address my argument?
@snakeoil. I was responding to someone who asked me study embryology.l, which I have. You know very well I'm not going to give my personal information on a forum such as this. Do you want to publish you name and address for me? I can tell you' i graduated med school in the early 2000's completed internal medicine at a top residency and completed a cardiology fellowship at another exceptional institution. You believe me or not I don't give a care, but my facts are sound how about you address those. And don't curse because I can give as well as I get, I've simply been trying to be cordial
Also you Call my example a false analogy. Why? Substantiate that claim

[answer-is-42]

@snakoil. You call it a false analogy. Why? Back up your assertion
Also who cares what the mother wants to deal with. If a mother doesn't want to deal with her 3 year old can she kill them? what the mother wants is irrelevant the only time it has any relevance is if you abide by the bodily autonomy arguement and it is inside her once it's she doesn't get that right to decide any more then you or I do. The parents are medical surrogates as long as they are working in the child's best interests. If a parent attempts to kill a 3 year old, they dont get to decide if we ca take them off the vent. Same here, if a mother decides she does not want her child to live she doesn't get to decide if it gets medical care

[Ravenshire]

A mother should understand the dangers of giving life.

Are you really so fucking ignorant as to believe there are any women out there who don't understand there are potential risks in pregnancy?!? There are potential risks to driving, so maybe we shouldn't drive. Besides, when a hypothetical risk becomes "you or your baby will die" shit changes quick.

If there is an actual dead fetus inside the womb then of course save the woman.

Gee, thanks for your generosity there.

If the baby can't be saved, save the woman. Life and death are natural. To selfishly choose one or the other is wrong.

Thought we'd been over this. What the fuck is so selfish about a crack-whore aborting to spare her child living in that environment. You're not presenting a new argument here. You're using different words and hoping we'll be duped.

Innocent, pure potential comes before sinners who knowingly bring offspring into shitty existence as far as I'm concerned.

Sure, potential. What if that baby is the next Mozart or Martin Luther King, Jr? Ok, let's talk potential. What if that baby is the next Hitler, Stalin or Pol Pot?!?

Besides, with today's technology, (to badly quote Sam Harris) every cell of your body is a potential human being. You commit a holocaust of human potential every time you scratch you nose. So, you really want to argue potential?

[Dystopia]

Should I be arrested because of all the sperm I've wasted jacking off? Because I'm killing potential geniuses.