Personhood

[No_God]

Despite the ethical or moral reasons, there is a lot of speculation if anencephalic babies can even donate organs in the first place...

The science of organ grafting in newly-born babies is incipient; its medium-term results are not well known, whereas its long-term results are not known at all. The organs of an anencephalic child can only be removed if the child has been certified dead. However, the criteria that define cerebral death cannot usually be applied to children under 7 days old. Before cerebral death is confirmed, the organs of such children may become so damaged that they are unfit for organ-donation. Anencephalic children do not have a rear brain but they do have a forebrain which usually functions normally at birth. The forebrain dies slowly and other organs may die in the intervening period of time.

http://www.anencephalie-info.org/e/faq.php#18

[là bạn điên]

So my mother got mad at me for referring to this






as an "it". She seems to think that once you're born you're automatically a person. And apparently I should be more sympathetic have a congenital cephalic disorder (hydrocephalus) of my own. but I told her that it doesn't have a brain therefore it doesn't think or feel, and so it's not a person. I also told her the woman that gave birth to it was selfish because all that time and medicine should have gone to actual children. What do you guys think? Is being "alive" enough to establish the title person? Am I being unnecessarily harsh?

The baby should have been euthanised. It just costs a fortune, has no awareness and will never recover. I would have died 20 years ago.

---

So my cousin who overdosed on heroin, who was completely brain dead, wasn't a person? He was an "it" because his brain didn't function? OR my daughter who was found to lack brain function when she was in utero?

This makes absolutely no sense to me... how can you call that baby an "it" and just write it off like it means less than dog shit. To me this seems heartless and just insulting. Abortion in these situations is completely subjective. It depends on the mother, her family, and her options at the time. Not everyone terminates pregnancies with birth defects. I did, but I would never judge another for their choices on terminating or not. I had an induction abortion at 27 weeks and I considered my daughter to be a person. I wasn't ready or even able to bring a severely mentally and physically disabled person into this world and neither was her father, his family, or my family. She was a person, not an it, I saw her... So, I take this as an insult when you call this baby an "it".

How could you be so insensitive? I think you should really think about using a little more empathy and being more sensitive to people's feelings on the matter. You never know who you are talking to or who knows more than you on these subjects.

yes your cousin was no longer a person in any meaningful sense and so was your daughter. Take an insult if you wish but it changes nothing. This is a place to discuss things that are unpalatable to some.

---

I don't mean to be an asshole about this but it really hits home with me. It would be a shame if this little baby was robbed of it's dignity and defined as "not a person".

The baby has no dignity. It has no feelings at all.

[No_God]

yes your cousin was no longer a person in any meaningful sense and so was your daughter. Take an insult if you wish but it changes nothing. This is a place to discuss things that are unpalatable to some.

Right, I agree this is a place to discuss sensitive topics. We're all different people from different walks of life and areas of the world. Someone is bound to get offended especially when they have experienced things people are insensitive about.


But anyway,

You brought up euthanasia. I don't totally agree with the mother's choice. I would have terminated the pregnancy early on. The quality of life for the baby and everyone involved is probably terrible. Honestly, I'm surprised the baby even lived this long...

[Fruity]

The baby doesn't even know it exists. No thought. Where does this dignity come from? It's not about the mother feeling it. It's about the kid.

So, say a baby is brain dead. Then what?

[Bad Wolf]

Maybe we should all define what we think a 'person' is? Because at the moment, the only thing distinguishing that baby from a mindless animal like a worm or insect is the fact that it is a human being.

[Darkstar]

Maybe we should all define what we think a 'person' is? Because at the moment, the only thing distinguishing that baby from a mindless animal like a worm or insect is the fact that it is a human being.

At least a worm can move and eat of its own volition, this baby can't even do that. This is why I think it is a human (genetically), but not a person; it cannot do anything voluntarily, and it has no mind to speak of.

---

I just watched the video now. Are those eye and mouth movement muscle reflexes?

[No_God]

Am I defining "person" differently than you guys? Maybe I am misunderstanding.

Darkstar, The National Institute of Neurological Disorders says "a baby born with anencephaly is usually blind, deaf, unconscious, and unable to feel pain. Although some individuals with anencephaly may be born with a rudimentary brain stem, the lack of a functioning cerebrum permanently rules out the possibility of ever gaining consciousness. Reflex actions such as breathing and responses to sound or touch may occur."


The blinking is just a reflex its not anything the baby is controlling voluntarily.

http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/anenc...ephaly.htm

[Darkstar]

Am I defining "person" differently than you guys? Maybe I am misunderstanding.

Possibly. Person would (as I define it) refer to any sapient being deserving of rights. Personally I would even extend that to sapient aliens. It is simply that humans are the only sapient beings on earth (probably), so the term 'person' is generally attributed to them indiscriminately, even to those who are quite literally (for lack of an euphemism) mindless husks.

[Whateverist]

This is murky because those capable of making the distinction regarding personhood and respect do not include the baby in question. Just as with dogs, what rights they are afforded is a question of our policy toward them. They cannot voice an opinion for themselves and certainly cannot demand any rights. The baby is in the same boat with a lot less to recommend it than the dog. Such damaged babies are at the mercy of the policies we adopt toward it. It can't make any demands of its own nor speak on its own behalf. Our policy is likely to be kind out of deference to the mother.

[SteelCurtain]

I would not define this child as a person. I sincerely feel for the mom, I could not imagine how to even cope with that sort of thing. I only hope the doctors gave her all the information and didn't lead her on. If that was the case, I would say that she made a selfish and poor decision. But that is me sitting on the outside, not ever having been put in this position. If this were my child, and my wife and I were forced to make this decision in hot cognition, I don't know what I'd do.

Now that the child is born, I am of the opinion that it's too late to do anything but care for the child until she dies. As far as the whole "it" thing, I don't know. I can see how your mom would see it as insensitive. She is a human child, she has a sex, you could call her a "she."