Zika crisis: each child with microencephaly in US to cost $10 million

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most likely Medicaid. I have a child with special needs so I'm somewhat familiar with Medicaid (we don't have it) - a lot of children with costly medical needs are on Medicaid, based on the child's income alone.

OK. So $10 million per child, and for example in Brazil we know they have thousands of microcephaly Zika cases. So that would mean increasing the Medicaid budget by $20 billion, give or take? Raise taxes, I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How dare we as a society help provide care for children with special needs? OP you are so right, all our SN kids should be aborted if known in utero and we should just kill those when we discover their SN later on in life. Thanks, good to know you are such caring individual.

Many babies with microencephaly don't live and/or live very short painful lives.

Actually many babies, children and teens do live those kinds of lives, but often they are not kept in public view. So, while they are alive and well, we don't see them often out in public. Who are you to decide if someone else's child has a right to live? How do you know the government will pay for it? We have done everything privately for our SN kid from schools to therapies. When we tried to get into the public school they gave us a huge run and basically refused. It wasn't worth spending the money on attorney fees vs. a private school. So, should my child never have been born because you may not deem his life worthy as your child's?

Honestly, this isn't about the fact that you made this decision for your family. The issue is whether the government should be able to legislate that all families must give birth to severely brain damaged children and support them with their own resources. Good for you for making that choice, and best of luck with your child... I just hope you can have an open mind to recognize this choice may not make sense for other families in different (medical, financial, personal) situations.

I didn't give birth nor did anyone let us know our child would have issues. It very easily could have been my child with similar issues. As a culture, yes I think we should all help to support these kids and families. Abortion should be a choice and families should get that choices, but just as often families do not know their child will have severe issues till it is too late. If the children are born in the US, they are citizens and are entitled to care as their birthright.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:get your wallets out, conservatives!

Thought they didn't believe that private citizens should foot the bill for government interventions in their lives?

So force a woman to carry a terminally-ill baby to term and then force her to go bankrupt caring for the baby's short, painful life. Nice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Microcephaly can occur for other reasons beside a Zika infection during pregnancy. State birth defects tracking systems have estimated that microcephaly ranges from 2 babies per 10,000 live births to about 12 babies per 10,000 live births in the Unites States.

Who pays for these babies now?

You're missing the point. With the current crisis, of mothers infected with Zika microcephaly rates are estimated at 13%. You do realize that Zika sweeps through a population very quickly, right? Mosquito AND sexual transmission. We have the right conditions for an epidemic because no one here has any immunity.

Actually it is not sweeping through the US. There has been one outbreak in July that consists of 14 people.

It is not sweeping through the US yet. Look how quickly it happened in Puerto Rico. CDC estimates that 25% of PR's population will be infected within the first year.

Oh, I forgot... you'd need to believe in science to look at this objectively.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:get your wallets out, conservatives!

Thought they didn't believe that private citizens should foot the bill for government interventions in their lives?

So force a woman to carry a terminally-ill baby to term and then force her to go bankrupt caring for the baby's short, painful life. Nice.

Mike Pence wants to run a theocracy. Impose his religious beliefs on everyone else...what happened to America, separation of church and state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How dare we as a society help provide care for children with special needs? OP you are so right, all our SN kids should be aborted if known in utero and we should just kill those when we discover their SN later on in life. Thanks, good to know you are such caring individual.

Many babies with microencephaly don't live and/or live very short painful lives.

Actually many babies, children and teens do live those kinds of lives, but often they are not kept in public view. So, while they are alive and well, we don't see them often out in public. Who are you to decide if someone else's child has a right to live? How do you know the government will pay for it? We have done everything privately for our SN kid from schools to therapies. When we tried to get into the public school they gave us a huge run and basically refused. It wasn't worth spending the money on attorney fees vs. a private school. So, should my child never have been born because you may not deem his life worthy as your child's?

Honestly, this isn't about the fact that you made this decision for your family. The issue is whether the government should be able to legislate that all families must give birth to severely brain damaged children and support them with their own resources. Good for you for making that choice, and best of luck with your child... I just hope you can have an open mind to recognize this choice may not make sense for other families in different (medical, financial, personal) situations.

I didn't give birth nor did anyone let us know our child would have issues. It very easily could have been my child with similar issues. As a culture, yes I think we should all help to support these kids and families. Abortion should be a choice and families should get that choices, but just as often families do not know their child will have severe issues till it is too late. If the children are born in the US, they are citizens and are entitled to care as their birthright.

Great, well, until Republicans are willing to put their money where their mouth is, I think families should be able to make the choice for themselves. We both know Trump/Pence haven't thought through what this means for everyday working people.

[Anonymous]

My child has microcephaly, not due to Zika and not something that could be detected in utero. There is no reason to think he will have a short, painful life. He is a joyful kid and attends a public school. He does have developmental and medical issues and has significantly more medical bills than a typical kid, which are covered through a combination of private insurance and Medicaid.

I am pro-choice, but using inaccurate and fear-mongering information about people with disabilities is not a good tactic for fighting abortion bans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still don't hear anyone responding to the question of who foots the bill. Just a lot of empty rhetoric about how precious all lives are.

If they're so precious, who is going to pay the price? That's a very practical question. Give me a practical answer.

Ask Hillary how she's going to pay for her goals, too.

debt - $1.2 trillion

$400m to Iran, which we probably borrowed from China

How about a compromise? What if we used more birth control? Being proactive ain't a bad thing, folks!

Um, a lot of the members of Congress who are opposing funding for Zika research also oppose funding for birth control and for education on how to use birth control.

Um, condoms aren't hard to get. I know. I work in a school.

The majority of public and private schools in the nation (over 70%) teach some form of sex ed. And pregnancies have been down.

Systems will find ways to include health courses in their frameworks. I graduated from an all-girls Catholic HS in the 80s. We learned about sex - even played around with condoms and bananas!

We can't help the dumb adults, however.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My child has microcephaly, not due to Zika and not something that could be detected in utero. There is no reason to think he will have a short, painful life. He is a joyful kid and attends a public school. He does have developmental and medical issues and has significantly more medical bills than a typical kid, which are covered through a combination of private insurance and Medicaid.

I am pro-choice, but using inaccurate and fear-mongering information about people with disabilities is not a good tactic for fighting abortion bans.

But if it were detected early and was very severe, shouldn't parents have the choice?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My child has microcephaly, not due to Zika and not something that could be detected in utero. There is no reason to think he will have a short, painful life. He is a joyful kid and attends a public school. He does have developmental and medical issues and has significantly more medical bills than a typical kid, which are covered through a combination of private insurance and Medicaid.

I am pro-choice, but using inaccurate and fear-mongering information about people with disabilities is not a good tactic for fighting abortion bans.

Good for your child. Microcephaly varies very widely in its effects. Some children have trouble seeing, sucking, moving around, and even growing. Yours is lucky. Count your blessings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Microcephaly can occur for other reasons beside a Zika infection during pregnancy. State birth defects tracking systems have estimated that microcephaly ranges from 2 babies per 10,000 live births to about 12 babies per 10,000 live births in the Unites States.

Who pays for these babies now?

You're missing the point. With the current crisis, of mothers infected with Zika microcephaly rates are estimated at 13%. You do realize that Zika sweeps through a population very quickly, right? Mosquito AND sexual transmission. We have the right conditions for an epidemic because no one here has any immunity.

Actually it is not sweeping through the US. There has been one outbreak in July that consists of 14 people.

It is not sweeping through the US yet. Look how quickly it happened in Puerto Rico. CDC estimates that 25% of PR's population will be infected within the first year.

Oh, I forgot... you'd need to believe in science to look at this objectively.

Show me the science that it will sweep through the US. The CDC and the NIH predict these micro-outbreaks to continue during mosquito season but caution against mass hysteria.
The CDC needs funding to be able to detect and then extinguish these outbreak, in the same manner that they responded to Dengue outbreaks in 2001.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My child has microcephaly, not due to Zika and not something that could be detected in utero. There is no reason to think he will have a short, painful life. He is a joyful kid and attends a public school. He does have developmental and medical issues and has significantly more medical bills than a typical kid, which are covered through a combination of private insurance and Medicaid.

I am pro-choice, but using inaccurate and fear-mongering information about people with disabilities is not a good tactic for fighting abortion bans.

Good for your child. Microcephaly varies very widely in its effects. Some children have trouble seeing, sucking, moving around, and even growing. Yours is lucky. Count your blessings.

So, her child is an exception and because the possibility that a child may not do as well, those kids should be aborted. Its one thing for parents to have a choice but those arguing say these kids should not get medicaid, which is there as a safety net for all of us, should we need it.

My MIL is on medicaid in a nursing home. Is that ok? If not, what would be the alternative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My child has microcephaly, not due to Zika and not something that could be detected in utero. There is no reason to think he will have a short, painful life. He is a joyful kid and attends a public school. He does have developmental and medical issues and has significantly more medical bills than a typical kid, which are covered through a combination of private insurance and Medicaid.

I am pro-choice, but using inaccurate and fear-mongering information about people with disabilities is not a good tactic for fighting abortion bans.

But if it were detected early and was very severe, shouldn't parents have the choice?

Yes, as I said I am pro choice. Personally I don't think I would abort a child with disabilities unless the condition was going to cause near certain very early death. i fear that the kind of language being used here--conflating all disabilities or special needs with short painful useless life--is inaccurate and denies the humanity of people with disabilities. It might also contribute to people feeling like it is the "responsible" thing to do to abort children with special needs, an idea I find horrific.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still don't hear anyone responding to the question of who foots the bill. Just a lot of empty rhetoric about how precious all lives are.

If they're so precious, who is going to pay the price? That's a very practical question. Give me a practical answer.

Ask Hillary how she's going to pay for her goals, too.

debt - $1.2 trillion

$400m to Iran, which we probably borrowed from China

How about a compromise? What if we used more birth control? Being proactive ain't a bad thing, folks!

You're missing the point. How many families are planning to have a baby in the next year or two in Zika affected or areas probable to get it? How many are pregnant right now? We can't fully "birth control" our way out of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My child has microcephaly, not due to Zika and not something that could be detected in utero. There is no reason to think he will have a short, painful life. He is a joyful kid and attends a public school. He does have developmental and medical issues and has significantly more medical bills than a typical kid, which are covered through a combination of private insurance and Medicaid.

I am pro-choice, but using inaccurate and fear-mongering information about people with disabilities is not a good tactic for fighting abortion bans.

But if it were detected early and was very severe, shouldn't parents have the choice?

Yes, as I said I am pro choice. Personally I don't think I would abort a child with disabilities unless the condition was going to cause near certain very early death. i fear that the kind of language being used here--conflating all disabilities or special needs with short painful useless life--is inaccurate and denies the humanity of people with disabilities. It might also contribute to people feeling like it is the "responsible" thing to do to abort children with special needs, an idea I find horrific.

It might be in cases of severe microcephaly. That's not horrific, that's reality.