What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Watch a scene from 2012, in theaters November 13 view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - Get ready for the biggest event in history – the end of time. How will you survive? 2012- opening 11/13
187 Comments
- hblask, on 06/29/2009, -3/+66My 4 y/o was born at 23 weeks, at 1.5 pounds. The early pictures of him are similar to that one. He is now healthy and happy and normal, a real blessing.
- avalanche123, on 06/29/2009, -11/+64Benjamin Button was born at 80 years and survived as well
- smacksaw, on 06/29/2009, -17/+69Interesting that they mention the abortion angle at the end there. Looking at that baby, as small as it was, is it justifiable to terminate it? It's uplifting to think about a child that can fit in your hand being nursed to health. It's sad to think about terminating it. I think the average woman would never have an abortion at 23 weeks anyway. It's a pretty extreme situation for it to happen so late. Perhaps a story like this will make women in that situation re-think such a late abortion. I don't know if it's 20 or 24 weeks that matters. When you're that far along, it's not "a bunch of cells" anymore. It should be an issue of education and counseling, not prohibition. Any woman who would abort something at 23 weeks which is clearly a baby, no amount of restriction is going to stop them.
If a woman is that determined to abort a baby that late into a pregnancy, there's more going on that just banning abortion can solve. There's probably serious personal issues, health or mental issues. Perhaps if the extremists on both sides worked at dealing with these individual issues we can make abortion obsolete instead of illegal. Seems like a better focus of our resources and money than either extreme. You have to ask yourself why someone would abort a baby like this. It doesn't make sense to a reasonable person under normal circumstances. Thus, we should try to understand the situation and help. Gov't should offer support for these woman, not leave them with no alternatives or put them up against a wall of law. Want to make a law? Help pregnant women in trouble. - shawnsnell, on 06/29/2009, -4/+29I was born at 23 weeks 39yrs ago and I am living a normal life...
I weighed in at a whopping 1lb 14oz... and this was in a military hospital! (Ft. Benning, Ga) - inactive, on 06/29/2009, -21/+46Why put arbitrary limits on abortion? It's possible that one day science will emerge that allows a two-month-old baby to be nursed to health. Or one month old. Or one week.
Rather than try to come up with silly criteria for defining the beginning of life ("it's the first heartbeat!" "no it's the first brainwave!" "no it's the ability for it to survive outside of the womb!"), why not just give the innocent child the benefit of the doubt and assume that life begins at conception? - dusanmal, on 06/29/2009, -2/+27...So the kid can live a life ...
- Zippo, on 06/29/2009, -5/+3023 weeks is nearly 6 months into a pregnancy. While I'm pro-choice, it's my opinion that, if you're going to get an abortion, you do it before the 4-5 month mark (as early as possible). After that, you should consider adoption as an alternative.
- JustJoe4Life, on 06/29/2009, -7/+27When is babby formed?
- fleischner, on 06/29/2009, -1/+21Fetuses aren't born. Babies are.
- billalbertson, on 06/29/2009, -0/+15I know you are entitled to your opinion, but the reason this baby was covered in the story was because she is a freakin' miracle baby. The chances of a baby like this surviving this long with NO significant medical issues is less than 1%. I should know, I am the father of a 28 weeker, and she was also a miracle in that sense. Her peers, on the other hand, have numerous medical issues, and any baby born at under 28 weeks has a slim hope of survival to toddlerhood in the first place.
There are a lot people out there who think that medical science can just magically make babies happen, but you need to spend some time talking to a NICU nurse before you decide whether someone has a "personal problem" if they decide to abort an early term baby. 9 times out of 10, it would be done because the doctor wants to save the mother. There are conditions like HALP, pre-eclampsia, and previa that will kill the mother in hours, and often can't be detected until they are already threatening the life of the mother. The rest of the time, the doctor has figured out that the baby has too many birth defects to survive on its own, and rather than go through a year or two of a torturous and short life for the parents, siblings, and the child itself, abortion is offered as a medically recommended option of being merciful in that situation. However, I have seen more parents try to have the baby anyways, rather than terminate, and just watch it die slowly.
As far as the technology involved in supporting early term babies, you can't even have a survivable early term birth without a number of drugs being pumped into the uterus to maturate the eyes and lungs. That is at least a week or two of in hospital treatment, and its a crapshoot if it works. Chances are, however, that if the birth is early it is because the mother is dying, so you don't get those two weeks. If it doesn't work, the baby is delivered and gets to gasp to death in its parents arms. That happened to my second daughter at 23 weeks, she was one of the other 99% that either don't make it or have severe issues.
Even if the baby makes it to the NICU, the parents or parent has to be able to make time every day to come in and take care of the baby. Most parents are double income households, and just can't make this work- when this happens, the baby fails to thrive and usually dies or has other complications. Also, you have numerous people going in and out of the NICU, so there are also opportunistic infections like the common cold that can simply kill the kid or leave it deaf and blind. And being in the NICU itself is heartrending, even if your kid is doing ok (again, 1%). You can't just hold your kid, there are protocols to follow to keep the kid safe. For that other 99%, its just a crushing painful experience, and many parents just can't deal with it. Some times, the father or mother just abandons the baby, so you are down to one parent doing all of the NICU stuff as well as trying to work and take care of the rest of the family.
Providing the baby survives that, chances are it will need a feeding tube and will have to be on several drugs throughout its childhood just to survive, because being in the womb to term allows it to develop the reflexive ability to eat, which can't be taught. Then there are the sight, balance, and hearing issues, the issues with the bowels and core strength being unnatually weak, and on, and on. There will also need to be multiple visits to various therapists, and medical specialist followups for hearing and speech pathology. Generally, most marriages don't survive past this point, I know that from watching couples disintegrate under the stress. The baby in this story, however, is one of that magical 1% that don't need these services, and again I know this because I have a surviving 1% kid.
Oh, and if you are American, its going to be something like $250,000 a month for NICU care. If you have *really* good health insurance, you will be paying for 20% of the total. Very early term babies, like the one in the news story, spend several weeks if not months in NICU. If you are double covered, like we were for our first daughter, you might end up owing something like $8-12k when all is said and done. In addition to all of the above, chances are most parents of these kids will also end up bankrupt as well.
So, please leave the question of abortion to those most qualified to deal with the issue, which would be the parents and the doctors involved. As far as THIS baby is concerned, she is truly amazing, and I am sure her parents are proud of their miracle child. - OverZealousHobo, on 06/29/2009, -3/+17well, for starters...if you had read the article, it actually says "Both her parents said they believed the limit (for termination) should be lowered."
I suppose he read the article to the end, that's how. - halo3d, on 06/29/2009, -1/+15No matter what, I hope the baby lives a happy and healthy life.
- cygnus2112, on 06/29/2009, -3/+16emt1451: Did you even read the article? The kid has passed all health tests.
However, I'm now wondering if you've developed mental or reading capacities fully. - dbonneville, on 06/29/2009, -2/+13how do you give the woman the benefit of the doubt as to when the life of the baby starts? that doesn't make any sense. what are you saying exactly?
- krekc, on 06/29/2009, -1/+12Thats a great story. My baby girl is due any day now Im thinking by the end of this week Im going to be a proud papa!
- cygnus2112, on 06/29/2009, -3/+14The only way to end this debate is to develop more reliable, inexpensive ways of contraception.
Most fetuses are aborted for social reasons, not for health reasons. - inactive, on 06/29/2009, -3/+13@emt1451
Who gives you the right to choose if a child wants to live or not. Through Church, I've met many wonderful kids with disabilities. I knew a high functioning down's syndrome boy named Jose who told me how proud of his parents he was because they knew he was going to be born with some kind of disease, and they decided to love him for who he was regardless. - uknowwhoibe, on 06/29/2009, -6/+16You'd rather give women the benefit of the doubt as to if they think they should kill it or not?
I'm not pushing my agenda on you, just rephrasing your question to show you how one-sided it sounds. - chuckDontSurf, on 06/29/2009, -2/+12Is that a wedding band on its arm? These arranged marriages are really getting out of hand.
- ousthouse, on 06/29/2009, -1/+10Most newspapers only cover the present news... but the great papers report news from the future.
- ravishingluke, on 06/29/2009, -1/+10Congrats, my girl will hopefully be at least a month behind yours.
- uknowwhoibe, on 06/29/2009, -5/+12What the ***** is wrong with you?
- Reebee52, on 06/29/2009, -4/+11This is, once more, foolish. The mother is likely neither a scientist, nor a philosopher, nor a god. The question of when life begins boils down to a philosophical question, that is mostly unprovable. But most people have agreed that abortions after the first trimester are too late. In questions involving philosophies like this, the people should decide a line. For the most part, the consensus is three months. Until science can show it to be later or earlier, philosophers can come up with a concept that makes us think differently, or God himself points out when life begins, we have to go by the people's views. Some say no abortion, that's their right. If they have answered the philosophical question for themselves, that life begins at conception, they can vote that way. Most people think life begins a little later, and that a bundle of cells does not constitute human life, regardless of genetic make up. So they've set the time limit a little longer.
But once we reach the consensus, it doesn't make sense for two women, both 23 weeks pregnant, to decide differently. Nobody thinks we should abort a living human. So it doesn't make sense if one woman decides her fetus is human, and another not to. The general consensus makes a line, and that line should be followed. - ghatid, on 06/29/2009, -0/+7Congrats!
- Reebee52, on 06/29/2009, -2/+9There have been multiple comments from people who have had, or were themselves, babies this young.
- aks123, on 06/29/2009, -2/+8If you want to care for a human embryo, then also care for animal suffering if you want to be morally consistent. Animals are "innocent life", have fully formed brains and nervous systems, and are more capable of thinking, suffering, and emotions than a human embryo.
- DontThinkSo, on 06/29/2009, -2/+8I was born two months early (born February 21st, supposed to be born end of April). I have pictures of myself fitting in my grandpa's (admittedly large) palm; it's a little unreal. I never really thought much of it growing up, but in high school science classes I began to read about preemies having developmental problems - improper growth, and impaired mental function. I have some problems regulating temperature (I quickly overheat in hot environments; Florida was hell), but other than that I've turned out completely normal. I have above-average grades, I'm slightly larger than normal (not obese; just "built"), and if it weren't for the pictures and some barely perceptible scars on my back (where a thermometer kept constant track of my temperature while I was in an incubator), I wouldn't have any indication that I was abnormal.
- ADifferentUsern, on 06/29/2009, -1/+7A slightly more philosophical angle; If the baby comes out of the mother at 23, and requires incubation, IV's intensive care, etc... at what point is the child no longer "born"? Because if a child can still live, being born that early, what's the difference from growing the child in a tube through the entire gestation period?
(I'm not saying they should have let the kid die... it just made me think, maybe tube babies are ok.) - ghatid, on 06/29/2009, -0/+6Congrats!
- Rndm_Tngnt, on 06/29/2009, -2/+8Seconded.
- ceredron, on 06/29/2009, -10/+16I love how that article turned into an abortion case real quickly.
- FreddieD, on 06/29/2009, -2/+8Do you think we should we go ahead and kill babies born with mental disabilities as well?
- Dipsomaniac, on 06/29/2009, -0/+5Why not give the woman the 'benefit of the doubt' and allow her to retain her fundamental right to say what's done with her body?
- Reebee52, on 06/29/2009, -2/+7So let's just kill the mentally handicapped then? Because his life is 'harder.' He faces lots of 'risks.'
Excuse while I bathe in my disgust for you. - VictoriaMaria, on 06/29/2009, -5/+9I'm sorry for your loss. Please look into Project Rachel, it's a program to help mothers and fathers of aborted children. I'll pray for you, if you don't mind.
- fantheblaze, on 06/29/2009, -0/+4These parents had 5 miscarriages before. Should've taken more precautions
or not had a baby at all considering how much trouble they had in the past.. - fish6650, on 06/29/2009, -0/+4yes it does on the picture caption..." Little fighter: Jessica weighed just 1lb 7oz when she was born 23 weeks early"
- 5urr3al5am, on 06/29/2009, -9/+13the pro-abortion crowd is very threatened by stuff like this... this would blow your mind.. if it comes out of the mother at 23 weeks its a baby.. if it stays in.. its nothing
- Paulish, on 06/29/2009, -0/+4You actually bring up a good point. If you take the fetus out of a woman and pretty much put it in an artificial technological uterus, is it ever really born at all?
- s0nicfreak, on 06/29/2009, -0/+4So why go through so much trouble, and risk having a child with lots of problems, instead of just ***** adopting one of the many children who already need a home?
- Taiyoryu, on 06/29/2009, -1/+5People have the right to life. What prolifers don't understand is that a person is _born_ with rights, not fertilized with them. For better or worse, an embryo, fetus, what have you, has no rights whatsoever, let alone any that supersede the rights of a woman. This is the reason the latest angle of their attack is to establish an unborn with personhood with various such bills introduced around the country.
This child having been born (prematurely) now has rights, including the right to life. - Reebee52, on 06/29/2009, -5/+9So let me get this straight... A woman gets the right the choose if a baby at this state, 23 weeks, which we know could survive outside the mother (though it would require constant care, it could still survive), is alive or dead? Therefore we know it has advanced brain functions that will advance, but if one woman CHOOSES to call that baby "Not alive" she can terminate it?
There's a line, somewhere, where a fetus is considered a human life. Some say it starts as early as conception, some say later. But I think anyone can see that at 6 months in (~23 weeks) we are actually dealing with a HUMAN life. And it is ***** stupid to say it's still the woman's choice to keep it or not. Sorry, I think she missed the boat on that one.
My feelings on abortion are conflicted and mixed, there's so many variables. But to give each individual woman the right declare her six month baby alive or dead is giving them powers that they shouldn't actually have. That thing is longer a part of 'her body' anymore. It's now a body of its own. - InfiniteNothing, on 06/29/2009, -0/+4I hope you're a vegetarian since say, pigs, are probably more self aware than a 1 year old
- Dipsomaniac, on 06/30/2009, -0/+3If you think that the state should hold so much power over a woman's body that it can literally tell her that she must remain pregnant under threat of law, then yes, you DO support slavery.
- Hraes, on 06/29/2009, -0/+3How the hell are you getting dugg up for this *****, Alex?
- maximm, on 06/29/2009, -0/+3spot on my friend
- scamper22, on 06/29/2009, -4/+7Because arbitrary limits are the best we have to balance the freedom of the mother with the right to life of the baby.
Because we are not God and cannot determine an exact date, so the best we can do is make an educated guess.
If you take away the 10% nutcases, almost everyone would agree a good compromise is to allow abortions in the first trimester and consider late term abortions murder.
During this time, the baby is not fully formed scientifically in terms of heart beat, brain activity...
3 months is also plenty of time for a women to realize she is pregnant and decide if she wants to abort or not.
Why 3 months? Why not 2 months? Why not 3 months 4 days and 2 hours?
Because it's an arbitrary limit that makes reasonable sense. If we discover better information in the future concerning when the baby can feel pain... then we can adjust our arbitrary limit accordingly.
If only we could all learn to accept this arbitrary limit instead of posturing on ideological impossibilities (how is a bunch of cells a baby... how do you not think a baby at 8 months is just as much a baby after it comes out of the womb), we could put this insane debate behind us. - geesamba, on 06/29/2009, -2/+5How girl get aborshun?
- apetrie, on 06/29/2009, -0/+3I wasn't arguing that a fetus at 23 weeks isn't too much of a human being to be terminated, I really don't know, it would be much too far along for me to ever consider it but I don't know if I could bring myself to have an abortion at all. I wouldn't want the right to taken away from me though, but thats beside the point.
abw1987 is suggesting that all abortion should be made illegal because we should consider life as starting at conception, THAT is what I have a problem with. - emt1451, on 06/29/2009, -4/+7No it doesn't
-
Show 51 - 100 of 191 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is