Kyle and Trish,
You make many valid points. I believe that from the moment of
conception there is a life and it isn't my call to say live or die.
If God has given doctors the ability to support life of very small
babies, and they make it through, then that was God's plan for that
life. I don't think I have a right to mess with that plan. Yes,
advances in medical science have allowed very small babies to live
that 20-30 years ago would not have. Yes, that means there MAY be a
higher chance of a multitude of disabilities. And to that I say -
That was what was supposed to be.
While I know my own mother still feels "guilty" and holds "anger"
towards the doctors who delivered me (as I think she just needs to
blame someone, even 35 years later), I also know she would not have
wanted me to die instead if she had known I would have CP. I also
know that I am "ok" with who I am, CP and all. In fact, I know my
life would not be as full and complete as it is if I wasn't who I am
- because this is the life I am supposed to have.
Does Khristina regret not saving cord blood, sounds like it. But
hindsight is 20/20 and we can't go back so you have to move on.
Linda
On Mar 14, 2008, at 9:15 AM, Trisha Cummings wrote:
> 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
-----------------------
To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:
http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy
|
