Hi Kyle,

   What I am curious about is when she says they saved her baby without
her knowing - Is she saying - she would have had them not save the baby?
While it is true that CP rates are up because they can save babies
earlier and earlier - it ends up being a moral question - Deciding who
lives and who dies. Unless you are clairvoyant one can't predict how the
child will turn out - I mean Amber was projected to be much more
seriously disabled than she is. One should understand from the moment
one is pregnant that a fat healthy baby may well not be the outcome -
and if you are not able to accept anything but the Gerber Baby- you need
to be neutered. Because you are seriously too stupid to have children in
the first place. Plus then the first time you exhibit a defect - they
should kill you. So anyone with anything other perfect health buys the
farm? Ouch, no Roosevelt - no Hawking. 

               Trisha - who also thinks she about to be offended - very
offended at that

-----Original Message-----
From: Cerebral Palsy List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Cleveland, Kyle E.
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 8:53 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: not what if/ and rate of CP not the same

Let me get this straight--I want to be absolutely sure I understand what
you're implying here.  "Saving" premature babies in order to bring them
into the ranks of the living is problem?  So medical science should not
be used to protect and preserve a life if that life is too fragile to
survive without it? =20

I daresay that many of us on this list would not be here if that were
the case.  Would it have been better to let us all perish because, after
all, life with a kid with disabilities is going to be more difficult
than raising a healthy child, right?

There are a bunch of us on this list whose parents were advised to
"institutionalize" us as small children because we would never walk,
talk, or have cognitive abilities greater than the average grapefruit.
I think as a group we've disproved that notion.

I think I am about to be offended.  I hope you can change my mind.

Kyle

-----Original Message-----
From: Cerebral Palsy List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of [log in to unmask]
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 8:21 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: not what if/ and rate of CP not the same

First off I was not saying... what if... I mentioned the fact that the
dr's=20
did not tell me they were saving my child.  I was mention the stem cell
thing=20
so if any of you had saved your cord blood you may want to check into
it.  I=20
think all they did was give him his blood back but it did not say... so
you=20
would have to look into it.
=20
As to the rates of CP.... they were the 1 birth problem that was way
down=20
'UNTIL' 20 or 30 years ago when doctor started 'saving'  and
experimenting and=20
making millions of preemies and their families.  The rate were down
because of=20
better prenatal care but then when they started adding the smaller and
smaller=20
babies back to the living the rates of CP when right back up.
=20
Just a thought-
Kristina



**************It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money
&=20
Finance.      (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=3Daolprf00030000000001)

-----------------------

To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:

http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=3Dc-palsy

-----------------------

To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:

http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=3Dc-palsy

-----------------------

To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:

http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy