![]() |
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
Dr. Braun: was Re: update on preterm deliveryFrom: anon (anonymous@obgyn.net)Wed, 26 Jun 2002 12:20:10 -0500 (CDT)
This raises in issue in my mind that I have often wondered about. If you were to give birth to a child and find that extreme measures were needed to "save" his or her life, with the possibility of lasting and severe health consequences, would you be legally required to take said measures, or could you opt not to do so, out of the belief that quality of life is important, and allowing such a child to live would be cruel? I feel as though it is heartless to think that way, BUT I really feel sometimes that the measures we go to to preserve life when life is not really worth preserving are in many ways cruel. People become so wrapped up in what having a child means to THEM that they do not really consider what such a life will be like for the child. Many years ago, when my husband's grandmother worked as a nurse, they would wrap such babies up warmly, and leave them alone while nature took its course. I am wondering if such an option is even available these days, or would you be held accountable for child endangerment or something along those lines? I'm not asking for an ethical judement on these beliefs, I am just wondering about the legal issues of allowing a child damaged at birth to quietly pass on. Thank you for your attention.
At Wed, 26 Jun 2002, R. Daniel Braun, MD wrote:
>Yes, they do. However as the Grandparent (primary caregiver) of one of
|
| |
Women's Insurance Checklist from Auto Insurance Quote home | medical professionals | women | industry | forums | internationale-mail | about us | advertising | our sponsors | contact us | disclaimer | This information is provided for educational purposes only. Please read the disclaimer. ©1996-2008, all rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission of MediSpecialty.com |