Tuesday, August 13, 2013

Progressive Medical Ethics, explained

After-birth abortion: why should the baby live? -- Giubilini and Minerva -- Journal of Medical Ethics:

Euthanasia, it's not just for old people anymore.

7 comments:

Theodore Seeber said...

"Euthanasia in infants has been proposed by philosophers for children with severe abnormalities whose lives can be expected to be not worth living and who are experiencing unbearable suffering."

In that particular case, I absolutely agree.

Theodore Seeber said...

I expected you to.

Theodore Seeber said...

1) Who defines what unbearable suffering is? I mean, under certain definitions, by that logic, I should've been killed once I hit puberty, because I've been in so much pain that I've passed out, had to go to the hospital to see if I had a ruptured appendix, been absent from school for weeks on end, almost had to give up my job, have been unable to stand, unable to stomach any food, and pretty much been through hell in one week.


How about psychologically? Again, according to some definitions of what should and should not qualify for being allowed to live, I should have been killed. I can't handle many emotions at one time, I can't handle being around a lot of people, or loud noises very well. I can function only moderately normally in society, and that's a taxing endeavor for me. I can imitate the psychological state of a homicidal maniac, an idiot, a psychopath, a genius, and pretty much anyone who I spend more than two hours with and actually know anything about. I very rarely feel truly happy with anything, or feel loved. Ever. I react with fake emotion and body language, using a combination of variables that allows me to pick out the appropriate reaction, and allows me to recognize, to some extent, which emotions were being conveyed to me, and which emotions I should pretend to show.


2) Several of my cousins would be dead because of this, since they have deformities which prevent them from talking, moving freely, or otherwise severely impede them. According to most pro-choicers I've asked about it, one of my cousins is "A poor, sad thing, who should've been aborted." my cousin is able to type, to some extent, and understands language perfectly well. She's actually quite smart (probably quite a bit smarter than me in several areas, since she has more study time), and has some limited typing ability. She's in pain often, yes. She once had the same sunburn for a year because she has such bad circulation, but she's happy. She feels loved by the people in her family, she's treated equally to all of them, and she does her best to repay that love by learning and comforting others as best she can.


3) Expectations of babies are generally prone to being the most unreliable ones of all anyhow. A child can develop in unexpected manners, psychologically, and physically. Just because a baby seems perfect, doesn't mean it will be, and just because they seem to have no chance in life doesn't mean that's going to be the case.

Theodore Seeber said...

Kathryn,

What you are asking is very subjective and I should have been more careful on how I responded way back when I did. I'm just not the kind of person who places enough value on life and I have at times contemplated suicide. I guess I am part of the culture of death that JPII talked about. I'm sorry for the hardships that you have had to endure. You state your case eloquently. I would have never figured you to be going through what you have said. Hang in there.

Theodore Seeber said...

Which is the point I feel that people often miss when it comes to what's known as mercy-killing. The thing is, unless you are the person going through it, or unless you have an identical psychological makeup, people can't say that it's unbearable suffering. To them it might have been, but to a person born into some of the disabilities that people qualify as grounds for an abortion, it's just a part of their life, and they don't let it rule their lives. Even in the case of people such as myself, who have more psychological issues, it's a part of who we are, and not something that people like me generally consider in a negative light.


For example, because I don't feel many emotions, when my friends or family are stressed out, they can come to me, because I can generally brighten up their mood and offer sound advice, because I don't feel the transmitted emotion. I know that there's emotion, but I don't feel it, so I can sympathize to a point, but it's not to such a point that I'm not able to help them because of it.


Likewise, people who have serious physical disabilities, often use them to help others, by encouraging people to continue working past obstacles, and by offering advice on how to get by.


While it's not a fun thing to have a disability, psychological or physical, the people who have them use them to give back to people who have helped them, and it helps them to be more optimistic, because of the disability, not in spite of it.

Theodore Seeber said...

Please don't feel slighted if I don't respond for a while. I have to go off the grid at times as most of us do. But I will get back to you.

Theodore Seeber said...

Completely understandable. The only reason why I'm posting right now is because I can't go to school, as per reason number one in my first comment on here.

Creative Commons License
Oustside The Asylum by Ted Seeber is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
Based on a work at http://outsidetheaustisticasylum.blogspot.com.