• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Democrats block Senate bill requiring medical care for babies that survive abortion

DarkWizard12 said:
So, again, what does that have to do with the bill? You're not talking about babies that have survived abortion, you're talking about babies born with a life threatening illness. Those are completely different things. Not every baby that survives an abortion has a life threatening illness.
Click to expand...

The bill ensures that the parents and their doctor can decide to withhold medical treatment.

Just a adults with life threatening illnesses can do. Just as parents of non-newly-born children with life threatening illnesses can do.
 
jdog21 said:
Point being that if the child can live without long term life support then the doctor has to try and save the childs life even if the parents don't them to, to not do it is negligent homicide.
Click to expand...

The point is wrong.
 
tres borrachos said:
Yup, especially the nurse midwives. That's why they (and also birthing centers) are so popular now.
Click to expand...

My daughter is an ER nurse at a major Seattle hospital. She is seriously considering that path.
 
Top Cat said:
My daughter is an ER nurse at a major Seattle hospital. She us seriously consideribg that path.
Click to expand...

Because I had gestational diabetes with each one of mine, I couldn't use them. I had to be under the care of OBs who specialized in high risk pregnancies. But so many of my girlfriends did, and wow, what a great and personal experience. Your daughter really should consider it.
 
year2late said:
Exactly. If the baby was born alive, it is more than possible the MD, might discuss comfort measures with the parents. They would discuss risks and benefits of procedures and it is up to the parents to decide how to proceed based on their beliefs. Not pursuing aggressive care in a baby (or child or adult) in a person with catastrophic illness is always on the table.
Click to expand...

prometeus said:
Nice rant, but odd that you did not want to say who pays. Why is that?
Click to expand...
The federal government pays
 
tres borrachos said:
So you oppose parents being able to remove their teenage sons from a breathing tube or feeding tube, because that teenager has all legal rights to life and the parents can't determine that?
Click to expand...
If their son has a decent chance at living a somewhat functional life if treatment were to commence, and removing a feeding tube would kill him then yes those parents would be committing a crime.
As a parent if I decide to not feed my kids after a week (or more give or take) have I not committed a crime?
 
sangha said:
The point is wrong.
Click to expand...

Please excuses me while I don't take your word for it. Patient care is decided in what is the best interest in the patients case, the patient here being the baby.
 
jdog21 said:
If their son has a decent chance at living a somewhat functional life if treatment were to commence, and removing a feeding tube would kill him then yes those parents would be committing a crime.
As a parent if I decide to not feed my kids after a week (or more give or take) have I not committed a crime?
Click to expand...

Please cite that law that says removing your teenage son from a feeding tube is a crime.
 
tres borrachos said:
So please do tell me why every parent that doesn't agree to leave their teenage sons on machines indefinitely are not charged with child abuse, child neglect or medical neglect.
Click to expand...
I think I did in post #106

So if there is a chance a baby could live a life off of life support then the doctor has to provide care to give that child that chance, regardless if the parents wish their kid dead. Only factor here is what is the cut off for reasonable chance is 30% chance 20% chance ect
 
jdog21 said:
I think I did in post #106

So if there is a chance a baby could live a life off of life support then the doctor has to provide care to give that child that chance, regardless if the parents wish their kid dead. Only factor here is what is the cut off for reasonable chance is 30% chance 20% chance ect
Click to expand...

Funny. I just looked at post 106. I didn't see you telling us why every parent who does that isn't arrested. But I can tell you. Because it isn't a crime.

Parents "wish their kid dead"? You actually, and ignorantly, believe that a couple goes through the joys, sorrows, trials and tribulations of pregnancy so they can say "I want my child dead".

Amazing. Not at all shocking though. Most of you have no idea what you're talking about.

By the way, the "factor" isn't up to us. It's determined by the doctor, and the decision belongs to the parents. Fact. When you have children, you will know what I mean.
 
jdog21 said:
If the child is alive a doctor must do all they can to keep the child alive and to heal them just like they would do for the mothers. Their can be no discussion on if the child deserves the chance to live or die, that's not up to the parents or the doctors, if the child is alive and once removed from the womb they already have all legal rights to life and no one can determine that they should just be killed or un cared for until death. We do not kill people just because they have disabilities, that's wrong and you know it.
Click to expand...
But there is discussion. If the baby is born with overwhelming catastrophic illness a parent and md may decide on no heroic measures.
 
Lutherf said:
I really don't understand this need for Democrats to be so pro-abortion that they can justify the taking of a viable life just because it's inconvenient or might be a mental strain on the mother. What's next for them? How much farther are they willing to go?
Click to expand...

A fetus is an existential threat that gets worse as it grows. Get that part through your head.
 
Looks like the GOPers have received marching orders to beat the abortion drum as loud as possible. Seems to be a theme now.
 
D_NATURED said:
A fetus is an existential threat that gets worse as it grows. Get that part through your head.
Click to expand...

I can't believe I have to ask this but was that a sarcastic comment or are you serious?
 
tres borrachos said:
Of course he made it up. For some reason, lots of things seem to be getting made up in this discussion.
Click to expand...

Like how you lied about your dad serving in WW2? That was made up as hell.
 
Cramer said:
What was so bad about it?
How long were you there?

Were you there as a civilian or military?
Click to expand...

Too much government control, over every thing.
 
apdst said:
Like how you lied about your dad serving in WW2? That was made up as hell.
Click to expand...

What on Earth are you babbling about? My father was an accountant for the army during WW2. Why did you bring my father into a thread about abortion?
 
tres borrachos said:
What on Earth are you babbling about? My father was an accountant for the army during WW2. Why did you bring my father into a thread about abortion?
Click to expand...

You were talking about posters lying. Sounded like as good a time as any to bring up your own lies.
 
apdst said:
Which is about 80 points ahead of the garden variety Liberal, in a 65° room. :lamo
Click to expand...

Yeah, there are some really bright Trumpkins.

12ocv9.jpg

:lamo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom