sakinago
Gold Member
- Sep 13, 2012
- 5,320
- 1,632
- 280
No she was not artificially kept breathing, or artificially feeding, didn't think there was such a thing. She had a feeding tube, so if you are on a feeding tube, your family can decide for you to stop that treatment? What if it's a breast feeding baby? That's a mothers body it's living off of. That's where it gets it's nourishment and immunity. Does the mom then not have the choice to stop giving breast milk to the child? Why not? Explain to me where the difference is, sell me on itSo terry chiavo wasn't viable to eat without a tube... Therefore husband had every right to remove it?So it is a question on when it can live on it's own?Ya, you are right - when I read it through again, it doesn't make sense.
Third trimester abortions are severely restricted and I support those restrictions - once a fetus is viable then it's not just her decision except if the pregnancy endangers her health or life or severe fetal defects that were undetectable earlier. I think at that point the fetus has rights that can't be denied. I have said that on multiple occassions - maybe not in this thread though.
Till the fetus is living and breathing apart from the mother's body, it is still up to her what happens to her body. If she is willing to male the commitment of her body for carrying the fetus and to give birth, that is her choice. If not, that too is her choice. Fetus does not live without her cooperation.
Late term is not simple thing to consider but when the life of the woman or the imminent suffering and death of the fetus is involved, it should be a decision she and her doctor make. Government and outsiders should not be a part of the decision.
There is no shortage of infants and children that need good homes in the world. Telling a woman she has no choice and has to carry and give birth is not your right and should never be. We are not a population of the verge of extinction that woman should be forced to be baby making machines. We are horrified by puppy mills but that is what you would force a women to be?
If the mother was willing and the fetus could be safely removed and transplanted.............but that is not yet a viable option yet. It is still the woman's seed and up to her if she would give it up. And if she was to be compensated for giving up tissue?
There are other causes to get involved in rather than a woman's right to choose if she is ready to be a mother or not. At what age, education level does she have or loose that right? If she is raped, does she have to carry the fetus? If she is undergoing medical treatment, does she have to give that up? What if she is in school or beginning a new job? What if there are other circumstances that make it the wrong time or just wrong for her? When is a woman's body her own? When do others have no say in what a woman can or chooses what is best for her physically, mentally, financially or moral for her? Religion should have no place in the law or a woman's right to choose.
She was not alive, she was being artificially kept fed and breathing. She had irreversible brain damage. Why should she have had to be kept under those conditions? That is not living. Her brain was a shriveled mass of dead cells. She should not have been kept so long like that. She should have been freed long before.