Probably just me

Anything that doesn't fit anywhere else, and is NON CH related - chat about the weather, or anything else that takes your fancy.

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Mid A 15
Button Grecian
Posts: 2924
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 1:38 pm
Real Name: Claude Rains
Location: The Patio Of England (Kent)

Probably just me

Post by Mid A 15 » Mon Mar 05, 2012 12:50 pm

but I find this, and the potential ramifications thereof, terrifying.

http://davidalton.net/2012/03/02/infant ... -too-late/
Ma A, Mid A 65 -72

Fjgrogan
Button Grecian
Posts: 1427
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 7:56 pm
Real Name: Frances Grogan (nee Haley)
Location: Surbiton, Surrey

Re: Probably just me

Post by Fjgrogan » Mon Mar 05, 2012 1:55 pm

No it is not just you. I agree. Did our parents not fight a World War to stop Hitler and his cronies behaving in this way? When the Abortion Bill became law, I seem to remember that it included a conscience clause to ensure that medical staff were not put in the position of having to be involved in operations to which they had a conscientious objection. However it also contained safeguards to ensure that abortion was not simply available on demand - what has happened to them? Too often today it seems to be regarded as another method of contraception! It is too easy to claim that proceeding with a pregnancy will have a deleterious effect on the woman's mental health. If a woman chooses to get blind drunk, as often happens, and then finds herself unexpectedly pregnant, that does not make her mentally ill; it means that she is stupid and irresponsible and probably not fit to be in charge of a baby, but this should not be used as an excuse to abort a healthy baby. I know that there are arguments against this - for example genuine rape. If the 'mother' concerned had to go through the full pregnancy and then give up the child for adoption, perhaps she would think more carefully about putting herself in that position again - there are vast numbers of families waiting to adopt. I know that this sounds too simplistic; there will always be cases where there is good medical reason not to continue a pregnancy, but they should be the exception rather than the rule. We seem to be moving into a situation where to have a conscience is regarded as unacceptable. I note by the way that the article was written by David Alton.
Frances Grogan (Haley) 6's 1956 - 62

'A clean house is a sign of a broken computer.'

User avatar
icomefromalanddownunder
Button Grecian
Posts: 1228
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 6:13 am
Real Name: Caroline Payne (nee Barrett)
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Probably just me

Post by icomefromalanddownunder » Tue Mar 06, 2012 1:50 am

I am struggling to write a coherent reply. Who are these people who would even consider euthanasing a child they had just given birth to? Do I want to be part of the society that they belong to? No, I do not.

Fjgrogan
Button Grecian
Posts: 1427
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 7:56 pm
Real Name: Frances Grogan (nee Haley)
Location: Surbiton, Surrey

Re: Probably just me

Post by Fjgrogan » Tue Mar 06, 2012 9:28 am

Nor I. And why do they have to cover it up with euphemisms like 'euthanasia' when what they really mean is 'kill' or even 'murder'? And they can probably get away with it because nobody who has just gone through the trauma of childbirth followed by the shock of finding that their child is disabled can possibly be in a fit state of mind to make that decision. I do not recall that 'Thou shalt not kill' came with exemption clauses, although I can understand that there are frequently occasions when we might wish that it did! I used to feel very rigidly that there were no exceptions to this rule, but I softened a bit when my 15-year-old niece found herself pregnant; after long hard thought, and knowing that she had the support of her family she rejected the offered 'termination' (another euphemism'?), only to find after a 20-week scan that the baby was seriously disabled and the pregnancy was unlikely to go full term. Eventually she went through a full induced labour at 24 weeks knowing that there would be no live child at the end of it. She was supported throughout by her parents and brothers and by a very squeamish boyfriend, whose family went off on holiday and left him to cope alone. Afterwards she grew up very quickly; she and the boyfriend remained friends, but she is now happily married to someone else and with two healthy sons. Soon after 'termination' she asked 'Where is my baby now?' and to my shame I found myself worrying about whether the answer that I wanted to give would be in accordance with the church's teaching. I also asked myself whether it was right that my own rigid view had been tempered by personal experience within my own close family! It is one thing to make sweeping decisions when they are theoretical, but can we stick to them when they hit home? And should we? Or should each decision be made on its own merits according to the current situation? I don't know the answer. I do know that having made her decision she did not need condemnation from fundamentalist churchgoers; what she was looking for was pastoral support to continue with her life.
Frances Grogan (Haley) 6's 1956 - 62

'A clean house is a sign of a broken computer.'

User avatar
J.R.
Forum Moderator
Posts: 14809
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 4:53 pm
Real Name: John Rutley
Location: Dorking, Surrey

Re: Probably just me

Post by J.R. » Wed Mar 07, 2012 1:36 pm

It certainly is a very frightening prospect !
John Rutley. Prep B & Coleridge B. 1958-1963.

Atticus
GE (Great Erasmus)
Posts: 138
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 5:17 pm

Re: Probably just me

Post by Atticus » Sat Mar 10, 2012 5:47 pm

I managed 5 minutes before feeling sick to the bottom of my stomach!

A gut reaction certainly - by as the mother of a severely disabled child who has exceeded all and every expectation of his life by the sheer love and determination of those around him and the deep love that he returns, I can only pity them.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests