A Case Of Life Or Death In A Texas Hospital. (Trees And Things)

thefadd: Re: Let the kid die, already.

Wed, 11 Apr 2007 12:30:06 EST

When you have more money, you have more options open to you. That is a cold, bare fact of existence. Even the most communist country which promises unlimited equal healthcare to all would, at some point, have to decide they couldn't put anymore money into

ms sue: Re: Let the kid die, already.

Wed, 11 Apr 2007 09:37:32 EST

We don't build our justice system around the urge to vengeance and rage, we shouldn't build social medical care around emotional arguments either.

I absolutely agree. But I guess my concern was more with the financial disparity in your comment. I

wetkarma: Re: Let the kid die, already.

Wed, 11 Apr 2007 08:39:37 EST

Would you hold the same opinion if you had limited resources and a child of your own in this or a similar situation?

Hi Ms Sue,
I think that if this particular kid were my child, I'd probably 'pull the plug' based on a) the lack of viabl

ms sue: Re: Let the kid die, already.

Tue, 10 Apr 2007 21:06:01 EST

Oh, but it is an individual's decision, if that individual has the financial means to back it up.

thefadd: Re: Let the kid die, already.

Tue, 10 Apr 2007 20:41:27 EST

I wouldn't expect him or anyone else to. But that's why it's not an individual's decision.

ms sue: Re: Let the kid die, already.

Tue, 10 Apr 2007 17:30:35 EST

Would you hold the same opinion if you had limited resources and a child of your own in this or a similar situation?

wetkarma: Re: Let the kid die, already.

Tue, 10 Apr 2007 15:48:08 EST

The one point I would contend with is where you claim quality of life isn't an issue. I can't see how any decision made by a state authority to allocate limited medical resources would be able to isolate the question to exclude quality fo life as a

wetkarma: Re: Let the kid die, already.

Tue, 10 Apr 2007 15:33:44 EST
I'm saying its because she doesn't have the money that the state gets to kill the kid and NOT because the state knows better whats for the kid.

gerrymander: Re: Let the kid die, already.

Tue, 10 Apr 2007 15:32:44 EST
I don't think we're disagreeing much here, wetkarma. I would also distrust euthanasia decisions being made without a guardian's consent, but that's not the case here. (I don't consider withholding expensive life-extension medical assistance from certainly-

thefadd: Re: Let the kid die, already.

Tue, 10 Apr 2007 14:18:02 EST
Since she doesn't have the money, what are you saying, then?

wetkarma: Re: Let the kid die, already.

Tue, 10 Apr 2007 13:45:08 EST

This is a case where the mother's desires are clearly against what is best for the child. The hospital made the right choice. Let Emilio die.
Gerry,
I disagree.
I am very, very, very suspicious of any sort of framework (which you seem

pO157: Re: Let the kid die, already.

Tue, 10 Apr 2007 11:51:41 EST
I just wonder what would happen under this Texas law if the person in question was an 86 year old with a history of heart problems (or some chronic illness) that caused him to be stuck on a ventilator indefinitely in a vegetative state. Would that (somethi

gerrymander: Let the kid die, already.

Tue, 10 Apr 2007 10:34:57 EST
Emilio Gonzales was dealt a poor genetic hand, and that sucks. In addition, it's a poor genetic hand which medicine isn't yet advanced enough to treat, and that sucks more. But let's review what his existence would be like, were it to continue: