Urgently Yours
Yet again, Jehovah's Witness parents fighting a heartless government that seeks to prevent them from providing for their children as they see fit. Parents own children, after all, they're theirs to do with as they will, isn't that so? Certainly in some societies it is, but not in others who seek to interfere, to bring havoc to honest and believing families. As is the case in British Columbia where sextuplets were born to a Jehovah's Witness family.
No blood transfusions, thank you very much. Not some strange blood coursing through the veins of our children. They'd be better off dead. And death is what they're destined for, without blood transfusions. Already of the six babies born vastly premature, frighteningly tiny, their critical bodily functions not yet prepared to meet the world independent of their mother's nurturing body, two have perished.
And in a desperate bid to save the remaining four tiny humans the state has intervened, contrary to the parents' wishes and consent informed by their religious beliefs. Yet maturation halted as slightly in excess of half of normal gestation has rendered these tiny beings susceptible to expiration without the urgent use of extraordinary life-saving methods.
Better briefly transient lives which garnered international attention and public wonder, than the potential for a normal life within the bosom of a loving family dependent on life-saving medical intervention? Does this ethos reflect that of parents whose devotion to their vulnerable offspring cannot be questioned?
If the avails of medical advances and scientifically-proven treatments in extreme situations of life and death are to be so casually foresworn why then seek intervention in bearing children to begin with? Although it's never been authenticated it is generally agreed that rare multiple-birth events such as this could only come about as a result of hormonal treatments, fertility drugs.
And once it became known through the use of scientific-medical instruments that six fetuses were being carried, the parents refused medical advice born of experience that to bring any of the fetuses to term and successful birth, it was advised to reduce the number through a process known as "selective reduction"; killing one or more of the fetuses to ensure the remaining ones matured with success.
What have we here? A use of medical science to enable pregnancy. A desperate choice to retain all the fetuses in favour of bearing six live babies through to term. A denial of opportunity for the surviving babies to be treated for dire medical frailties once two of the tiny siblings perished. Are these people conflicted? Do they know what they want?
A perfect world with no opportunities for things to go awry. Failing that, flailing helplessly about, hoping for a "best resolution", gifted by god.
No blood transfusions, thank you very much. Not some strange blood coursing through the veins of our children. They'd be better off dead. And death is what they're destined for, without blood transfusions. Already of the six babies born vastly premature, frighteningly tiny, their critical bodily functions not yet prepared to meet the world independent of their mother's nurturing body, two have perished.
And in a desperate bid to save the remaining four tiny humans the state has intervened, contrary to the parents' wishes and consent informed by their religious beliefs. Yet maturation halted as slightly in excess of half of normal gestation has rendered these tiny beings susceptible to expiration without the urgent use of extraordinary life-saving methods.
Better briefly transient lives which garnered international attention and public wonder, than the potential for a normal life within the bosom of a loving family dependent on life-saving medical intervention? Does this ethos reflect that of parents whose devotion to their vulnerable offspring cannot be questioned?
If the avails of medical advances and scientifically-proven treatments in extreme situations of life and death are to be so casually foresworn why then seek intervention in bearing children to begin with? Although it's never been authenticated it is generally agreed that rare multiple-birth events such as this could only come about as a result of hormonal treatments, fertility drugs.
And once it became known through the use of scientific-medical instruments that six fetuses were being carried, the parents refused medical advice born of experience that to bring any of the fetuses to term and successful birth, it was advised to reduce the number through a process known as "selective reduction"; killing one or more of the fetuses to ensure the remaining ones matured with success.
What have we here? A use of medical science to enable pregnancy. A desperate choice to retain all the fetuses in favour of bearing six live babies through to term. A denial of opportunity for the surviving babies to be treated for dire medical frailties once two of the tiny siblings perished. Are these people conflicted? Do they know what they want?
A perfect world with no opportunities for things to go awry. Failing that, flailing helplessly about, hoping for a "best resolution", gifted by god.
Labels: Religion
posted by Pieface | 5:01 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home