IMO

Jun 3, 2016 5:11 AM

KetchupHead

Views

18

Likes

139

Dislikes

26

I have a buddy that had a child with a form of Mitochondrial disease. The child has never been able to interact with its surroundings, speak, breath on its own, or do ANY 'normal' or 'semi-normal' activity a child can do. It's constantly on a ventilator and needs 24 hour nursing care. It does not vocalize or even open its eyes. Over the past month the family has been fighting for more nursing care and support from the state government. Today, the mother posted on FB about almost getting in a car accident while bringing the child home (again) from the hospital. They are unable to pay for nursing care out of pocket, so when the child started having breathing difficulties the mother (in traffic) turned from the drivers seat to suction the kids trach almost causing an accident. She complained on FB about how this is the states fault, and how it's abuse from the state to let the child be 'given up on.'

I just don't get it. Let the kid go. May seem cold, but the kid is a shell of nothingness.

I kinda feel like this applies to anyone. Quality of life trumps morality.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

The kid sounds like a real powerhouse

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Can they do that legally? Wouldn't they be charged with neglect or "falling to provide the necessities of life"?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

...and every year, technology will improve and that threshold will shift a little. It's always a bit of a guess, with math, yes, but a guess

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

And hopefully we'll get to a day where this isn't a worry anymore

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

There should be such a thing as "quality of life"... as you said, sounds horrible, but letting go might be the best option

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

My 16 y/o cousin was in a car crash last Christmas eve. He was in a comaand on Life support for a month. And I agree wholeheartedly.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Keeping a child alive for your own selfish needs is the ultimate act of cruelty

10 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 1

I agree.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Yeah, long term life support sounds like hell, especially if there's nothing else to be done.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I can't come up with a valid argument against your view.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I agree with OP, but you guys have to realize this isn't easy for the parents. If i was a parent, i couldn't get myself to pull the plug

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

At this point is the kid really alive? The kid's never done anything, that's not life.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

That child isnt a human, its selfish for those parents to be so scared of their own suffering if the child dies they dont care about it.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

I feel like these cases and special kids should be "put down" sounds horribly imoral but I feel they are more trouble and wasteful 1)

10 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 4

There is a much greater argument for euthanizing old people. Three quarters of your health care is used in the last few months of your life.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

In resources and time. I'm sure the families are loving and amazing but I see taking care of them is impractical as taking a older dog. 2)

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

Whether they're trouble or not, I think it's important whether or not they can have a decent life. Born just to nothing but suffering, bad.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Will be a burden and big waste of time and money to these families. Can't have a normal life having to take care of an extra person. 3)

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

Not to mention, what good would it be if you never got to "live." to be concious but unable to ever interact with the world? no thanks.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Exactly, I would feel like it's unfair to put someone through all of that.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Babies can't thrive on their own.. They need to be fed multiple times a day, plus 1000 other things. What about that?

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 8

Babies grow up, eventually become independent. That disease is not curable and by context clues, kid's got it real bad. You're reaching.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

You're making no sense. A baby has a life expectancy of maybe 70 years and doesn't cost much. This kid has lived past his life expectancy

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

A baby has a life expectancy of a few days unless there's someone there to take care of it.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

But the kid OP's talking about will probably die regardless, and it costs a hell of a lot of taxpayers money, wherras a normal kid won't

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

(My point was a baby cannot "thrive" on it's own. It needs someone to take care of it. And op suggests kids like that should be left to die)

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The kid is almost 7

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Right, but even a child at that age cannot provide for themselves.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

I don't know about you, but I could breathing on my own at 7.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

You misread what I said.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

I could make toast and pop a movie into the VCR. Run my own bath.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That's tough to stomach as a parent, you would do anything to help/save your child. In the odd scenario where you had to die to save my kid

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Without a doubt I would hunt you down and kill you for the serum that would save my child's life. Not because I'm a bad ass, but because I

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

love my children so much, I would do anything for them. That's what you do as a parent, hopefully 99.999% of the time it doesn't involve

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

murder and destruction...

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

We should offer the same mercy to adults. But religious extremists feel it is necessary to live no matter what, almost like they thrive /2

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

On the suffering of others. We're having an assisted dying debate up in Canada right now, and the against people are all religious nuts.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I agree. It's a rough choice, but it's the best choice, imo. No one wants to bury a child, but life isn't fair and it just sucks sometimes.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

You can make another one. Really. It's not even hard.

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 2

It helps to be hard, though...

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

30 seconds

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Unfortunately Mitochondrial disease are genetic and the chance that their next kid would have the same thing is VERY high.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Well that sucks. Maybe they can use in vitro fertilization to pick an embryo that's not affected?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Adoption is probably a good choice when you look at the cost of adoption verses the cost of keeping the kid alive (emotional & financial)

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

It's their fucking kid. The parents love it, and don't want it to die

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Also, some people have trouble conceiving a child, I feel for these parents. Even though I accept OP's point, it's not easy for the parents

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Regardless of whether they should let the kid go, the state should definitely not pay for its care anymore.

10 years ago | Likes 41 Dislikes 6

Should put the age of the child in there, thought it was just an infant at first. Since it's been 7 years of this however then yeah I agree

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

At first I was thinking of a kid who won't become anything great.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Why wouldn't state pay for that? That's what state is for.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 9

Because they have been giving 100% support for over 6 years (way past its life expectancy) I can only imagine the hundreds of thousands it

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Costs to keep him alive every year.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

This is ethical question, not financial.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

Would we even ask this question if it was a 75 year old person?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

State gets its justification by being there for the man. You think that ending the necessary care would change the parents point of view?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Why not both? Wasting thousands of dollars of medical resources on this child instead of using it to help those in poverty......

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

And financial should be considered, due to tax dollars being spent on it.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Nursing home diversions cost $5k per month. Keeping the child at home must be cheaper than that or they state would say "put them in skilled

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Nursing". Maybe that's what the state is truly saying. Any way it is definitely an ethical issue. The state sees that it is a child in need

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Not a loss of adult potential. Wasteful in your opinion but an obligation to the state not to judge based on potential futures.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

I like how you refer to this child as "it" repeatedly.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

This.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

Unfortunately that's how I feel 'it' should be addressed. Again,imo

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

If youre unaware of your surrounding, cant see or talk,have no personality,do you have a gender?Some say your anatomy doesn't define gender.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

At what point do you deserve enough dignity not to be objectified? They are using it to dehumanize someone, not to avoid assigning a gender

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

My grandpa called my grandma IT all the time. I thought it was hilarious. It was a strange kind of endearment. Especially as a kid.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Ooh, good point.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Yep. Clearly doesn't see the kid as human so already I'm aware of the bias.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

The kid cannot eat on its own. Breath on its own. Urinate or defecate on its own. Speak. Interact. Has been pronounce brain dead twice......

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

If I'm ever brain dead, I hope those around me would offer me dignity and care and not dehumanize me simply because my family can't let go.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Has no quality of life. I work with the developmentally delayed. They need to let this one go. Some can have a quality of life others no.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Mitochondrial disease? Like a Jedi?

10 years ago | Likes 46 Dislikes 3

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Or a Sith... Vader had a ventilator >.> uh oh

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Oh holy shit that's good. +1 to you, sir/madam/attack helo.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell

10 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 0

The midichlorian is the powerhouse of the cell

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It pretty much beat the crap out of that kids cells.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I might have slept/drank through most of my bio classes but I'm pretty sure it also makes you a Jedi.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Not the kid's cells... They're m, uh, not doin' so well

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

midichlorians is for Jedis. LOL

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

thatsthejoke

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

What'd I say?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Mitochondria. DUH

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

So the kid can force choke a nurse?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That's the joke

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0