Another dead child in the trash, another victory for the pro-abortion crowd.  

As long as there is money to be made off of healthcare for the elderly and nursing homes and hospices for the elderly, you needn't worry about people trying to "kill off" elderly people.

So you are okay with someone throwing a baby in the trash!!!!! Babies born that premature have lived! It had a developed nervous system and can you imagine the pain as it slowly died in the trash!

I am sorry I was a little rash in my comment. I just get so angry at stories like this!! After reading your comment I now understand what you meant. I know you don't think this is okay!! But one point is that babies have lived that were bron this early. There is a chance that this baby could have lived.
I am truly sorry!!

No problem. :)

And I think it depends...sometimes, it's more humane to let the baby die. Statistically, a 23 week premie has a 10-35% chance of survival. But the problem is that they'll end up with a lot of serious physical and mental problems, so it's really a case by case basis.

Regardless, I think that he has a responsibility as a medical professional to minimize suffering, so I think what he did was appalling. He should have his license revoked and thrown into jail.

This post contains content of a mature nature. You must be Signed in or Registered to have the option to view this content.

Well said Taskr.

Saffron, really, take a moment and think about what you said. The callousness of your words is chilling.

Hi Taskr,

I wasn't talking about people overreacting to what happened to the baby, but rather to the larger issue of abortion. Any decent human being would be disgusted at the treatment of this baby, and I these people should be thrown into jail for being so negligent. But stories like these, elicit a strong emotional reaction and will undoubtedly be used by extremists to mislead the public into thinking that it is much more prevalent than it is. Both sides are guilty of this though: for every story about a dying baby being thrown in the trash, there is a story about a young girl who is raped by her father and forced to carry the baby in a country where abortion is illegal. They are no doubt horrific, but fortunately they happen very rarely.

"That's a lie, plain and simple. You have no way of knowing whether or not the child would have died. That excuse has never held up in court when people have been tried for murder of terminally ill people."

At a place such as this one, she most likely would have died. I doubt the abortion clinic has NICUs or the proper facilities to save the life of this child. I am not, however, advocating the murder of terminally ill people or this baby. I don't think that they should kill her after she was born, merely that they should at least provide end of life care to the child to make sure that she was as comfortable as possible, akin to providing palliative care to a terminally ill patient. There is no question that the way that how this baby was treated is absolutely despicable.

This may not be about abortion being right or wrong, but even the title is supposed to elicit strong, one-sided reactions that prevent more nuanced discussion about the larger issue. Another victory for the "pro-abortion crowd"? Please. It's painting the pro-choice crowd with a rather broad stroke.

I agree the title could've been different. It is trying to point the finger at the pro choicers, when in this case it was the fault of a negligent doctor, not the entire pro choice community.

As for his behavior, he should definitely be pinned for murder!

What's your bullsht about 10-35 percent chance of survival? Do you mean to say that they should just give up on the baby if it has less than a 35 percent possibility of survival? If they did that, I wouldn't have my wonderful fiance, who was born 3 MONTH PREMATURE! By all rights, according to your words, he should be dead. However, he is alive and kicking and has nothing wrong with him save his blindness, which again was caused due to medical negligence. They keped him in the damnable incubator too long. So don't even give me the BS about 10-35 percent survival. I also have 4 friends, quadruplets, that were all premies and only one of them has a severe developmental disorder. One is blind and walks a little odd due to Cerebral Paulsy, and another again has CP, but sees fine and is just a little slow, not even by much. Another has nothing at all wrong with her and then there is the last one that has severe developmental issues. Still, 3 perfectly functional children out of 4 isn't bad, especially considering how common it is for multis to have problems.

I'm so sick of people with the stupid attitude of 'oh they've only got a slim chance so just let them go' crapp!

""pro-abortion crowd"? Please. It's painting the pro-choice crowd with a rather broad stroke."

I differentiate between pro-choice and pro-abortion. Pro-choice people want women to have a choice, but many want abortions to stop in general. I understand them because in some ways abortion is a symptom of a greater problem and treating symptoms alone never fixes anything.

Pro-abortion people, on the other hand, actively WANT more abortions to happen. These are organizations such as Planned Parenthood who treat abortion like secondary birth control, and often encourage it over the choice of having the child and either raising it, or putting it up for adoption. Planned Parenthood even used the 9-11 tragedy to further their agenda by offering the widows FREE abortions. Some in the pro-choice crowd don't really believe such people exist, but I've seen plenty of proof that they do and this is one more example. These are the people that refer to unborn children as "parasites" and "benign tumors".

Ah, okay. I think I can understand where you're coming from. It's just that I've seen "pro-abortion" used a lot to refer to pro-choicers in general so I kind of took offense to the title.

A few years back, I remember reading about how PP hands out the lowest quality condoms. They've changed that now, but they still only meet minimum safety standards apparently.

Do you really think I give a crap about the 5 cents I might get for starting a discussion? If I really cared at all about earnings I'd be one of those people who start 30 meaningless threads a day.

IT IS NOT A REFERRAL LINK and it is a link to an article which is relevant to the discussion, NO VIOLATION OF GUIDELINES HAS OCCURRED.

I wonder if mylot is going to pay YOU for a post that contributes nothing to the discussion.