Doctors 'should have the right to KILL unwanted or disabled babies at birth

25 posts / 0 new
Last post
lollywood's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 1 month ago
Joined: 2 Feb 2011 - 17:59

Doctors 'should have the right to KILL unwanted or disabled babies at birth as they are not a real person' claims former Oxford academic

Doctors should have the right to kill newborn babies because they are disabled, too expensive or simply unwanted by their mothers, an academic with links to Oxford University has claimed.

The piece argues that, though the child may be happy, it will not reach the potential of a normal child.

‘To bring up such children might be an unbearable burden on the family and on society as a whole’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2108433/Doctors-right-kill-unwanted-disabled-babies-birth-real-person-claims-Oxford-academic.html#ixzz1o14UXeMN

lollywood's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 1 month ago
Joined: 2 Feb 2011 - 17:59

The piece argues that, though the child may be happy, it will not reach the potential of a normal child.

‘To bring up such children might be an unbearable burden on the family and on society as a whole’

I agree with this, I've been saying this on here

My English is not very good

You
You's picture
Online
Last seen: 1 min 44 sec ago
Joined: 24 Jun 2005 - 21:33

It would have been interesting if they had this option as a one off case when you were born.

Its time to be angry.

Nasheedgirl's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: 10 Apr 2010 - 00:36

How come I just knew that this topic was something lollywood would've started!?! Blum 3

"That's the thing about pain. It demands to be felt" - Augustus Waters

Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: 4 Aug 2011 - 00:57

You wrote:
It would have been interesting if they had this option as a one off case when you were born.

Lol ouch!

 

You
You's picture
Online
Last seen: 1 min 44 sec ago
Joined: 24 Jun 2005 - 21:33

_Me_ wrote:
You wrote:
It would have been interesting if they had this option as a one off case when you were born.

Lol ouch!

Its about practicing what you preach. why start with other people and their babies when starting with him would be a better case for him to consider.

Its time to be angry.

Offline
Last seen: 1 year 2 months ago
Joined: 9 May 2008 - 18:20

u got. any kids lollywood?

who cares what this academic says, its just his opinion he hould kerp it for his tea break discussions. the baby belongs to th mothet no third party has a right to kill a child without her consent, otherwise we may as well be in a communist state.

“O my people! Truly, this life of the world is nothing but a (quick passing) enjoyment, and verily, the hereafter that is the home that will remain forever.” [Ghafir : 39]

Offline
Last seen: 20 hours 28 min ago
Joined: 8 Nov 2008 - 21:39

Third parties have the right to kill another's child, in a communist state?

"How many people find fault in what they're reading and the fault is in their own understanding" Al Mutanabbi

sully (not verified)

You wrote:
It would have been interesting if they had this option as a one off case when you were born.

Lol

You
You's picture
Online
Last seen: 1 min 44 sec ago
Joined: 24 Jun 2005 - 21:33

Hajjar wrote:
the baby belongs to the mother

separate discussion but interesting.

Its time to be angry.

The Seeker's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 2 months ago
Joined: 23 Feb 2011 - 00:06

People don't have the right to decide if one life is worth less than another. You should only have children if you are going to love them and look after them regardless of disabilities. Its a test and those disabled children can live full and fulfilling lives. The notion of disabled people being a burden on society is like the Nazi regime where Hitler had death camps for disabled people- it was illegal to be unemployed so obviously if you couldn't work especially if you couldn't carry out your army conscription you would quietly be taken away and killed.

 

You
You's picture
Online
Last seen: 1 min 44 sec ago
Joined: 24 Jun 2005 - 21:33

I be mean.

It's just easy to say about others.

and I think there is a point where maybe the baby cant survive on its own or would be in constant pain and cant really have a viable life, but even there I would be extremely uncomfortable and probably generally against the idea.

Its time to be angry.

lollywood's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 1 month ago
Joined: 2 Feb 2011 - 17:59

Hajjar wrote:
u got. any kids lollywood?

No

Hajjar wrote:

who cares what this academic says, its just his opinion he hould kerp it for his tea break discussions.

We should care if we want a healthy society

Hajjar wrote:

the baby belongs to the mother no third party has a right to kill a child without her consent, otherwise we may as well be in a communist state.

Ok, the baby belongs to the mother then the mother should not ask for any sort of help from the state

My English is not very good

lollywood's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 1 month ago
Joined: 2 Feb 2011 - 17:59

The Seeker wrote:
People don't have the right to decide if one life is worth less than another. You should only have children if you are going to love them and look after them regardless of disabilities.

But the child would never have a normal life it may not be able to reproduce

The Seeker wrote:

Its a test and those disabled children can live full and fulfilling lives. The notion of disabled people being a burden on society is like the Nazi regime where Hitler had death camps for disabled people-

How can they live full and fulfilling lives if they need help with everything?

My English is not very good

The Seeker's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 2 months ago
Joined: 23 Feb 2011 - 00:06

lollywood wrote:
The Seeker wrote:
People don't have the right to decide if one life is worth less than another. You should only have children if you are going to love them and look after them regardless of disabilities.

But the child would never have a normal life it may not be able to reproduce

The Seeker wrote:

Its a test and those disabled children can live full and fulfilling lives. The notion of disabled people being a burden on society is like the Nazi regime where Hitler had death camps for disabled people-

How can they live full and fulfilling lives if they need help with everything?

By not being able to reproduce how does that make them abnormal and not worthy of love? There are plenty of women who cannot conceive naturally and men who can't produce healthy sperm but who are otherwise completely healthy - are they not normal?

Also disabled people can have fulfilling lives, they may not be able to do all the things that able bodies people can do but this doesn't mean that they won't be happy and some disabled people such as people with a missing leg etc can hold down respectable jobs. An example of this is Alison Lapper she is a model, painter, MBE and a mother but has no arms and truncated legs but she even has a driving licence.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alison_Lapper I would say that she's had a pretty fulfilling life.

 

The Seeker's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 2 months ago
Joined: 23 Feb 2011 - 00:06

not to say that a driving licence is the height of fulfilment Biggrin

 

The Lamp's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 7 months ago
Joined: 10 Nov 2008 - 11:59

lollywood wrote:
The Seeker wrote:
People don't have the right to decide if one life is worth less than another. You should only have children if you are going to love them and look after them regardless of disabilities.

But the child would never have a normal life it may not be able to reproduce

The Seeker wrote:

Its a test and those disabled children can live full and fulfilling lives. The notion of disabled people being a burden on society is like the Nazi regime where Hitler had death camps for disabled people-

How can they live full and fulfilling lives if they need help with everything?

Minverva and even you Lollywood, haven't made a compelling argument as to why we should kill a human being, just because they might be a "burden".

Why shouldn't we help the most vulnerable? Why should we sell our humanity just because it might cost a little. Do you know that most families are given help with children? It's called child benefit.

What is a healthy society? One that is tolerant and humane towards one another or one where the weaker or "undesirables" are killed off in the name of health?
Definately, not the second one.

"If you stand for nothing, you'll fall for anything!"

Motto of Outlandish

lollywood's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 1 month ago
Joined: 2 Feb 2011 - 17:59

The Seeker wrote:
By not being able to reproduce how does that make them abnormal and not worthy of love?

The whole point of marriage and children is to extend the family

The Seeker wrote:

There are plenty of women who cannot conceive naturally and men who can't produce healthy sperm but who are otherwise completely healthy - are they not normal?

They’re not, but at least they can do everything for themselves and not be a burden on others

The Seeker wrote:

Also disabled people can have fulfilling lives, they may not be able to do all the things that able bodies people can do but this doesn't mean that they won't be happy and some disabled people such as people with a missing leg etc can hold down respectable jobs.

That's not a happy life that's a life of misery and suffering

How would a person with a missing leg feel when he-she sees other people with 2 legs walking and running?

The Seeker wrote:

An example of this is Alison Lapper she is a model, painter, MBE and a mother but has no arms and truncated legs but she even has a driving licence.

Imagine how much difficulty she faces everyday?

My English is not very good

lollywood's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 1 month ago
Joined: 2 Feb 2011 - 17:59

The Lamp wrote:

Minverva and even you Lollywood, haven't made a compelling argument as to why we should kill a human being, just because they might be a "burden".

Same sa I said they will never have a normal life, they will never be able to do anything for themselves, who pays for the treatment? who looks after them when the parents die? who pays for that care?

The Lamp wrote:

Why shouldn't we help the most vulnerable? Why should we sell our humanity just because it might cost a little.

Our help would not get rid of their disability or make it better

We can't look after our old how are we going to look after the disabled?

The Lamp wrote:

Do you know that most families are given help with children? It's called child benefit.

You think that all of the child benefit is spent on the child?
With the new teenage moms they spend that money on drink and cigarettes

The Lamp wrote:

What is a healthy society?

A healthy society is one where everyone has no health problems everyone can walk stand up sit down and do all the basic daily things like brushing teeth having a bath putting on cloths without any sort of help

My English is not very good

The Lamp's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 7 months ago
Joined: 10 Nov 2008 - 11:59

A society where people are not prepared to help each other, where they view the disabled as sub-human because it might cost a little money is NOT healthy!

How can you morally justify your position? Put aside the greedy argument of money.

Have a look at this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pddfGIFKsBo

"If you stand for nothing, you'll fall for anything!"

Motto of Outlandish

Offline
Last seen: 1 year 2 months ago
Joined: 9 May 2008 - 18:20

lollywood have some kids thn we can discuss this pathetic line of arguing, coz thts all it is, it makes me sick. btw this is a muslim forum and abortion is forbidden unless there is a dire need. in islam aborting kids coz of disabilities is not deemed dire, rape or death during labour is. all other arguments fall on deaf ears.

if ur so concerned about the drainage of our nhs resources go and tackle binge drnking which costs the uk thousands, our a&es are full of yobs with drink related injuries.

some docs clearly confuse themselves with god, all that knowledge has made things a bit fuzzy up there

wht do the state do iin china they mke ppl abort kids. the state dictates how mny kids thy can have evn though unlike th uk eveything has to be paid for without welfare support. its the same sort of path this doc is suggesting. mean which babies would be aborted, some with epilepsy, downs, cerebsl palsy why should a human play god

“O my people! Truly, this life of the world is nothing but a (quick passing) enjoyment, and verily, the hereafter that is the home that will remain forever.” [Ghafir : 39]

lollywood's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 1 month ago
Joined: 2 Feb 2011 - 17:59

Hajjar wrote:
it makes me sick. btw this is a muslim forum and abortion is forbidden unless there is a dire need.

What if the gov decide that anyway?

Hajjar wrote:

in islam aborting kids coz of disabilities is not deemed dire, rape or death during labour is. all other arguments fall on deaf ears.

Why is it not deemed dire?

Hajjar wrote:

if you're so concerned about the drainage of our nhs resources go and tackle binge drinking which costs the uk thousands, our a&es are full of yobs with drink related injuries.

I think alcohol should be banned

Hajjar wrote:

what do the state do in china they make people abort kids.
the state dictates how many kids they can have even though unlike the uk everything has to be paid for without welfare support.

But look at the great progress China has made, every thing has the words made in China on it, every state has rules which you have to follow

My English is not very good

lollywood's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 1 month ago
Joined: 2 Feb 2011 - 17:59

Tony Nicklinson, 58, from Melksham, Wiltshire, has "locked-in syndrome" following a stroke in 2005 and is unable to carry out his own suicide

Mr Nicklinson, who communicates through the use of an electronic board or special computer, said before the ruling that his life was "dull, miserable, demeaning, undignified and intolerable".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17336774

My English is not very good

s.b.f's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 55 min ago
Joined: 1 Oct 2008 - 19:18

The only reason why people comment on threads like yours lollywood is because:
1) you are too easy to argue with
2) you are too easy to throw insults at

That's about it really.

If there is another reason, then please let me know.

 

lollywood's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 1 month ago
Joined: 2 Feb 2011 - 17:59

s.b.f wrote:

If there is another reason, then please let me know

The topics are interesting

My English is not very good