Rethinking viability....

[Moot]

....because a fetus's brain isn't fully developed until after 39-41 weeks of gestation inside the womb. Without a developed brain a fetus still inside the womb is no more a person than someone who is pronounced brain dead.


"...The researchers and other experts said the results suggest that the definition of prematurity should be reconsidered.

The findings also raise questions about hastening childbirth by scheduling cesarean deliveries for convenience — because women are tired of being pregnant or doctors are busy — rather than for medical reasons, the researchers say....<snip>

"There are still a lot of babies who are being delivered more or less electively at 37 and 38 weeks, with people thinking, ‘This is no big deal — these babies are full-term.’ I think this is a big deal," Aschner said. She was not involved in the study.

Aschner said no one is recommending trying to delay childbirth for women who go into labor at 37 weeks or 38 weeks.

"I don’t want to panic moms whose babies come at 37 weeks," she said. "But those elective early deliveries really need to stop."

Early full-term babies may face later school woes | The Salt Lake Tribune



With all the modern medicine and technology, humans are failing to outsmart Mother nature....because Mother still knows best.

 

[spud_meister]

I was born at 36 weeks, and my brains seems to work fine.

 

[Jerry]

The brain isn't fully developed until 26 years after birth.

 

[Moot]

I was born at 36 weeks, and my brains seems to work fine.

Did you struggle in school and/or have a lot of health problems as a child?

 

[spud_meister]

Did you struggle in school and/or have a lot of health problems as a child?

Nope, in primary school I was top of all my classes, and the only health problem I have is poor eyesight.

 

[Moot]

Nope, in primary school I was top of all my classes, and the only health problem I have is poor eyesight.

According to the article those born at 37 weeks or sooner are at greater risk of having learning disabilities and health problems. Risk doesn't mean that all preemies will have problems only that they are greater risk. Sounds like you got lucky. But even so, your brain wasn't fully developed when you were born and you probably spent some time in ICU, no?

 

[kerussll]

As some of you might know, I am a nurse who works in a NICU. I am actually at work right now on my break. Sitting here in our break room is the same article being discussed here. I'd. Like to write a more detailed post later when I have a better keyboard to type on, but I just had to chime in now. Moot, you are a bit misguided here. Yes, a baby's brain develops more every day. The best place for it to do this is in utero for as long as it is possible. But to assume a 36 weeker would have serious health problems and need a NICU stay... Well, I chuckled at that a bit. He did not "get lucky." he is very typical.

 

[Moot]

As some of you might know, I am a nurse who works in a NICU. I am actually at work right now on my break. Sitting here in our break room is the same article being discussed here. I'd. Like to write a more detailed post later when I have a better keyboard to type on, but I just had to chime in now. Moot, you are a bit misguided here. Yes, a baby's brain develops more every day. The best place for it to do this is in utero for as long as it is possible. But to assume a 36 weeker would have serious health problems and need a NICU stay... Well, I chuckled at that a bit. He did not "get lucky." he is very typical.

Thanks, that is good know. But for argument sake, the link in the article seems to confirm that premature births are at greater risk of developing health problems and learning disabilities. I assume this occurs after the baby leaves the hospital and not in an NICU. But I will admit that the differences in the studies test scores seem almost minute as to be neglible.

 

[Daktoria]

With all the modern medicine and technology, humans are failing to outsmart Mother nature....because Mother still knows best.

I'm not sure if that's the issue.

The issue is due diligence. Regardless of whether or not Mother knows best, we want to make sure that Mother is making the effort rather than taking the excuse of might makes right.

As for viability itself, that's a nonsequitur. Facts are not values, subjects are not objects, people are not things.

 

[Moot]

I was born at 36 weeks, and my brains seems to work fine.

Okay, well how many "brains" do you have? LOL

 

[Moot]

I'm not sure if that's the issue.

The issue is due diligence. Regardless of whether or not Mother knows best, we want to make sure that Mother is making the effort rather than taking the excuse of might makes right.

As for viability itself, that's a nonsequitur. Facts are not values, subjects are not objects, people are not things.

So do you think that having a C-section for the convience of the doctor or mother is okay? Pro-lifers are always whining about "abortion on demand" but what about women who are tired of being pregnant or doctors who don't want their golf game interupted and chose to have an early delivery by Ceasarian thereby putting the child at risk for health and learning disabilities or even death? And if a preemie dies from having an elective early delivery then wouldn't that be considered an abortion?

"...In 2010, almost 15 million infants were born prematurely worldwide. That is over one in ten babies born. South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa account for 60% of premature births, whilst the USA and Brazil are placed amongst the top ten countries with the highest premature birth rate with 517,000 and 279,300 premature births in 2010....<snip>

Worldwide, preterm birth, i.e. births before week 37 of gestation, is still the single biggest cause of neonatal death and ranks in second place as the most common cause of mortality in children below the age of 5 years, claiming the lives of 1.1 million infants every year...read..."

Premature Birth Rates Increase In Most Of The World

Btw, when I said "Mother" I really did mean Mother Nature and that she is best to decide when a fetus is viable and not the government or the politiicans or the clergy or political activists or people sitting at home in front of their computers telling other people how to live.

 

[Daktoria]

So do you think that having a C-section for the convience of the doctor or mother is okay? Pro-lifers are always whining about "abortion on demand" but what about women who are tired of being pregnant or doctors who don't want their golf game interupted and chose to have an early delivery by Ceasarian thereby putting the child at risk for health and learning disabilities or even death? And if a preemie dies from having an elective early delivery then wouldn't that be considered an abortion?

As long as due diligence is exercised in making sure premature births' have their vulnerability covered, that's fine.

Btw, when I said "Mother" I really did mean Mother Nature and that she is best to decide when a fetus is viable and not the government or the politiicans or the clergy or political activists or people sitting at home in front of their computers telling other people how to live.

You mean "body primacy".

I agree. Parents are the best judges of what to do because they're involved.

We want to make sure they're committed to doing something. Believe me, I'm not interested in mental slavery to think for another's family.

 

[Moot]

As long as due diligence is exercised in making sure premature births' have their vulnerability covered, that's fine.

You mean "body primacy".

What do you mean "body primacy"?

I agree. Parents are the best judges of what to do because they're involved.

We want to make sure they're committed to doing something. Believe me, I'm not interested in mental slavery to think for another's family.

Wow, so we actually agree on something? I don't know what to say. lol

 

[Daktoria]

What do you mean "body primacy"?

Intuitive emotion. Only the person who has feelings can directly read what those feelings are.

Outsiders might be better at reading feelings, but they don't have access to data itself. It's the same reason why I oppose social programs in general. Social programs suggest that government knows what's best for you, but it can't because it doesn't know what you want.

Due diligence here means making sure Mother actually exercises intuitive emotion for the best interest of the child since the child didn't consent to exist.

Wow, so we actually agree on something? I don't know what to say. lol

:2razz:

 

[tessaesque]

The brain doesn't complete it's development until you're about 25. Should we say that anybody can be "aborted" up to 25 years of age?

Viability is and should always be about the point at which an infant is more likely to survive than die if removed from the womb. The only issue up for debate as far as I see is whether or not we should consider the necessary use of life sustaining machines for infants born prematurely.

As to elective early delivery, risk is not guarantee.

I have a higher risk of acquiring diabetes because it has shown up on both sides of my family. But I can combat that risk by eating healthy, maintaining a healthy weight, and watching for early signs of diabetes. I would not be "lucky" if I did not acquire diabetes, because my risk does not guarantee the onset.

Likewise with children born before 40 weeks, the risk of deficiencies is not a guarantee of same. Parents can do quite a bit to encourage the development of neural processes in early-birth children to help thwart the risks they face. But to assume a child is "lucky" because they suffered no noticeable under development simply because they were at a higher risk is a bit hyperbolic.

 

[choiceone]

The brain isn't fully developed until 26 years after birth.

In some cases, that is not enough.

 

[choiceone]

Thanks, that is good know. But for argument sake, the link in the article seems to confirm that premature births are at greater risk of developing health problems and learning disabilities. I assume this occurs after the baby leaves the hospital and not in an NICU. But I will admit that the differences in the studies test scores seem almost minute as to be neglible.

Moot, babies whose mothers smoke and drink are at risk of stunted growth and fetal alcohol syndrome. Well, no one knew that when my mom got pregnant with me. I am several inches taller than my sister, who was inside my mother during WWII, when it was hard to get cigarettes and my mom lived with her parents, so she would not have either smoked or drunk every day. I certainly did not have fetal alcohol syndrome, either. Medicine is telling you about rare risks. Which is not to say that a woman should have a caesarian because her stupid doctor wants to get to his golf game.

 

[Moot]

Intuitive emotion. Only the person who has feelings can directly read what those feelings are.

Outsiders might be better at reading feelings, but they don't have access to data itself. It's the same reason why I oppose social programs in general. Social programs suggest that government knows what's best for you, but it can't because it doesn't know what you want.

Due diligence here means making sure Mother actually exercises intuitive emotion for the best interest of the child since the child didn't consent to exist.



:2razz:

body primacy = gut reaction. LOL But I don't how you make sure women to rely on intution during a pregnancy or even if they have it, since some women don't even know they're pregnant until a baby pops out. Personally, I didn't believe that until I started reading how uneducated some women from poor communitees really are and after reading about how in Africa men are raping baby girls because they think it will cure their AIDS, so I do believe it now.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

According to the article those born at 37 weeks or sooner are at greater risk of having learning disabilities and health problems. Risk doesn't mean that all preemies will have problems only that they are greater risk. Sounds like you got lucky. But even so, your brain wasn't fully developed when you were born and you probably spent some time in ICU, no?

That is not what this article is saying.

A full-term pregnancy can be between 37 and 42 weeks. It depends on the woman, and the fetus. Different fetuses develop at different rates. 40 weeks is an average, not a hard-and-fast rule.

I was born at 38 weeks, and considered to be full term due to my size and other health factors. I was very healthy, went home straight away, and I'm plenty bright. For me, and for my mother, 38 weeks was full term.

What this is discussing is that it might be risky for women to elect to have their baby at 37 or 38 weeks when their body and their baby are not ready. Being induced or having a planned C-section is very common in our culture, which means that a lot of babies born at 37 and 38 weeks were born too early, because they were removed electively before the woman's body gave the signal.

What's more, even for babies removed at this time when they aren't ready, the differences are slight. They would not be in ICU unless they had other health problems. Doctors would not remove babies at 37 weeks if it routinely resulted in them winding up in the ICU.

 

[Moot]

Moot, babies whose mothers smoke and drink are at risk of stunted growth and fetal alcohol syndrome. Well, no one knew that when my mom got pregnant with me. I am several inches taller than my sister, who was inside my mother during WWII, when it was hard to get cigarettes and my mom lived with her parents, so she would not have either smoked or drunk every day. I certainly did not have fetal alcohol syndrome, either. Medicine is telling you about rare risks. Which is not to say that a woman should have a caesarian because her stupid doctor wants to get to his golf game.

That is true, choiceone. There are many factors that can lead to pre-mature births and subsequent health problems and you've named some of them. But the choice to have a medically unneccessary Ceasarian especially when the fetus is less than 37 weeks is coming up in study after study as also being one of the causes for health and learning problems during a childs first five years. Granted it now seems to be more of a problem in Asian countries, but it wasn't too long ago that here in the states Ceasarisans were routinely given to almost every pregnant woman that walked in the door of a hospital (one out of three) and it was mainly done to protect the doctors from law suits and rising insurance rates. But it's only been in the last couple of years that people have started to question the practice and now with studies showing just how detrimental it is the wheels are starting to turn the other way. So I guess it's just a matter of what we don't know until we do know.


Article from 2009....

"In the last decade, the number of cesarean sections — or C-sections — performed in America has nearly doubled. In fact, in the country today, approximately 30 percent of all babies born in the United States are delivered by C-section.

A study published in the New England Journal of Medicine finds that more than a third of C-section are performed too early -- before 39 weeks -- putting newborns at greater risk for a variety of health problems.

While many of these C-sections are medically indicated, the study found that more than half are done on an elective basis. 36 percent of women having elective C-sections scheduled their delivery before the recommended 39 weeks, making babies more likely to visit the intensive care unit, have infections and develop respiratory distress....read

Pros and Cons: Elective C-Section - ABC News

 

[Moot]

That is not what this article is saying.

A full-term pregnancy can be between 37 and 42 weeks. It depends on the woman, and the fetus. Different fetuses develop at different rates. 40 weeks is an average, not a hard-and-fast rule.

I was born at 38 weeks, and considered to be full term due to my size and other health factors. I was very healthy, went home straight away, and I'm plenty bright. For me, and for my mother, 38 weeks was full term.

What this is discussing is that it might be risky for women to elect to have their baby at 37 or 38 weeks when their body and their baby are not ready. Being induced or having a planned C-section is very common in our culture, which means that a lot of babies born at 37 and 38 weeks were born too early, because they were removed electively before the woman's body gave the signal.

What's more, even for babies removed at this time when they aren't ready, the differences are slight. They would not be in ICU unless they had other health problems. Doctors would not remove babies at 37 weeks if it routinely resulted in them winding up in the ICU.

As usual, what you say makes sense, S&M. But you are basically agreeing with what I said, no?

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

As usual, what you say makes sense, S&M. But you are basically agreeing with what I said, no?

Well, not really.

You can't assume every baby born at 37 or 38 weeks is premature. Some were just ready to be born then.

But even if they weren't, you're sort of over-blowing the risk here. Yes, there is a risk, but like I said, if removing a baby 2 weeks early resulted in them winding up in the ICU, doctors wouldn't have been doing it for so long.

The point this study is making is that just because we can't SEE the difference (because these babies who are removed early appear reasonably healthy) doesn't mean there isn't one. It is NOT saying that these babies are at serious risk, or that all babies born at 38 weeks are early.

 

[choiceone]

That is true, choiceone. There are many factors that can lead to pre-mature births and subsequent health problems and you've named some of them. But the choice to have a medically unneccessary Ceasarian especially when the fetus is less than 37 weeks is coming up in study after study as also being one of the causes for health and learning problems during a childs first five years. Granted it now seems to be more of a problem in Asian countries, but it wasn't too long ago that here in the states Ceasarisans were routinely given to almost every pregnant woman that walked in the door of a hospital (one out of three) and it was mainly done to protect the doctors from law suits and rising insurance rates. But it's only been in the last couple of years that people have started to question the practice and now with studies showing just how detrimental it is the wheels are starting to turn the other way. So I guess it's just a matter of what we don't know until we do know.


Article from 2009....

"In the last decade, the number of cesarean sections — or C-sections — performed in America has nearly doubled. In fact, in the country today, approximately 30 percent of all babies born in the United States are delivered by C-section.

A study published in the New England Journal of Medicine finds that more than a third of C-section are performed too early -- before 39 weeks -- putting newborns at greater risk for a variety of health problems.

While many of these C-sections are medically indicated, the study found that more than half are done on an elective basis. 36 percent of women having elective C-sections scheduled their delivery before the recommended 39 weeks, making babies more likely to visit the intensive care unit, have infections and develop respiratory distress....read

Pros and Cons: Elective C-Section - ABC News

I definitely think that no one should have a caesarian unless it is medically necessary. They are not good for you, and most people say that having one child by caesarian will make it quite difficult to have another by a different method. It's dangerous to do it - it's major surgery. Here in NY, the rate is now much higher than before, and people have been calling it into question here, too.

 

[kerussll]

But the choice to have a medically unneccessary Ceasarian especially when the fetus is less than 37 weeks is coming up in study after study as also being one of the causes for health and learning problems during a childs first five years.

Uhh what? Who is doing elective c-sections on premature babies? That sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen, and I'm not sure any doctors would be dumb enough to agree to this.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Did you struggle in school and/or have a lot of health problems as a child?

I think he's an Aussie