Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The experience that most cemented my pro choice view was a clinical rotation in pediatric long term ventilator ward with children sustained on vents for years with brain damage, just laying in a bed due to congenital abnormality, eyes staring, getting suctioned through their trachs all day.

Children do not spend years in vent wards.

They are discharged home. They receive vent support at home.

You don’t get to remove other people’s children from life support.

Unless you want to be one of those “angel of death” medical professionals who kill their patients to “end their suffering.”

Those people are jailed because they are psychopaths masquerading as medical professionals.

Usually at home, but yes there are some places that provide permanent long term care for children. Hospital for Sick Children in DC is one. Not sure why you think you are an expert on chronic vent patient care? Have you, personally, cared for these patients?

And I was not advocating for removing them, but cemented for me my own choice if pregnant with a child with a major medical condition facing a life like that if I continued with the pregnancy. Do you believe I should he allowed that choice?

I also have provided care for other adult chronic vent patients. There are long term care hospitals in the area where these patients reside like both Bridgepoint locations or Cadia Hyattsville. Sometimes this makes sense and sometimes we sustain people literally because the family cannot let go. This is why most healthcare workers would not choose excessive intervention, because they have seen the ramifications up close. The Pitt is a show that does a good job displaying a family going through the decision to let a loved one die vs attempt futile intervention in hope of a miracle.

Anyway, if this is what the family wanted, great, but if not, I take it you believe they should not have had a choice? That is the biggest question here, not the specifics of this case, but whether a family is allowed to choose.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The experience that most cemented my pro choice view was a clinical rotation in pediatric long term ventilator ward with children sustained on vents for years with brain damage, just laying in a bed due to congenital abnormality, eyes staring, getting suctioned through their trachs all day.

Children do not spend years in vent wards.

They are discharged home. They receive vent support at home.

You don’t get to remove other people’s children from life support.

Unless you want to be one of those “angel of death” medical professionals who kill their patients to “end their suffering.”

Those people are jailed because they are psychopaths masquerading as medical professionals.

Anonymous wrote:The experience that most cemented my pro choice view was a clinical rotation in pediatric long term ventilator ward with children sustained on vents for years with brain damage, just laying in a bed due to congenital abnormality, eyes staring, getting suctioned through their trachs all day.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are these people excited for this going to also be excited for their taxes going to cover this baby's Medicaid and SSD for the next 80+ years? Considering the fact that the Right wants to gut Medicaid, I'm going to say no.

We have a medically fragile micro-preemie in my family. She was born at 25 weeks and weighed 1.2 lbs. She was in the NICU for 157 days. Each day in the NICU was basically $21k. Just her NICU stay alone clocked in at over $3 million dollars. That didn't include the 'others' like meds, care team, equipment, etc. That was just the amount for the NICU incubator. A hospital social worker worked with my sister to get my niece on Medicare. My sis and BIL had no idea she would even qualify because they have good jobs and private insurance. The social worker was amazing! She taught them so many things that they didn't know about medically fragile/disabled kids + Medicaid. Before she was born, they had no idea that Medicaid could be given to just 1 family member even if the family was well-off.

My niece is now 2 but she will never live a normal, traditional life. She has a trach-vent, which requires round-the-clock care. That's fully funded and provided by Medicaid. My sister's & BILs private insurance did NOT cover that, which is one thing the hospital social worker taught them. She also has CP, a seizure disorder, and other issues. Just one of her hospital stays for something minor like a cold can rack up a $500k bill.

I thought democrats were different than republicans because democrats want to help the poor, needy, and sick?

Aren’t democrats all for the safety net that helps poor, needy, and sick people?

The baby is here and he’s a wanted child.

Why are we supposed to worry about caring for him via taxpayer dollars? That’s what taxpayer dollars are for? Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, is all for sick and disabled people.

What about his qualify of life? Does it matter how much he will suffer in life or not? Is the only thing that matters that he is alive?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are these people excited for this going to also be excited for their taxes going to cover this baby's Medicaid and SSD for the next 80+ years? Considering the fact that the Right wants to gut Medicaid, I'm going to say no.

We have a medically fragile micro-preemie in my family. She was born at 25 weeks and weighed 1.2 lbs. She was in the NICU for 157 days. Each day in the NICU was basically $21k. Just her NICU stay alone clocked in at over $3 million dollars. That didn't include the 'others' like meds, care team, equipment, etc. That was just the amount for the NICU incubator. A hospital social worker worked with my sister to get my niece on Medicare. My sis and BIL had no idea she would even qualify because they have good jobs and private insurance. The social worker was amazing! She taught them so many things that they didn't know about medically fragile/disabled kids + Medicaid. Before she was born, they had no idea that Medicaid could be given to just 1 family member even if the family was well-off.

My niece is now 2 but she will never live a normal, traditional life. She has a trach-vent, which requires round-the-clock care. That's fully funded and provided by Medicaid. My sister's & BILs private insurance did NOT cover that, which is one thing the hospital social worker taught them. She also has CP, a seizure disorder, and other issues. Just one of her hospital stays for something minor like a cold can rack up a $500k bill.

I thought democrats were different than republicans because democrats want to help the poor, needy, and sick?

Aren’t democrats all for the safety net that helps poor, needy, and sick people?

The baby is here and he’s a wanted child.

Why are we supposed to worry about caring for him via taxpayer dollars? That’s what taxpayer dollars are for? Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, is all for sick and disabled people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are these people excited for this going to also be excited for their taxes going to cover this baby's Medicaid and SSD for the next 80+ years? Considering the fact that the Right wants to gut Medicaid, I'm going to say no.

We have a medically fragile micro-preemie in my family. She was born at 25 weeks and weighed 1.2 lbs. She was in the NICU for 157 days. Each day in the NICU was basically $21k. Just her NICU stay alone clocked in at over $3 million dollars. That didn't include the 'others' like meds, care team, equipment, etc. That was just the amount for the NICU incubator. A hospital social worker worked with my sister to get my niece on Medicare. My sis and BIL had no idea she would even qualify because they have good jobs and private insurance. The social worker was amazing! She taught them so many things that they didn't know about medically fragile/disabled kids + Medicaid. Before she was born, they had no idea that Medicaid could be given to just 1 family member even if the family was well-off.

My niece is now 2 but she will never live a normal, traditional life. She has a trach-vent, which requires round-the-clock care. That's fully funded and provided by Medicaid. My sister's & BILs private insurance did NOT cover that, which is one thing the hospital social worker taught them. She also has CP, a seizure disorder, and other issues. Just one of her hospital stays for something minor like a cold can rack up a $500k bill.

I thought democrats were different than republicans because democrats want to help the poor, needy, and sick?

Aren’t democrats all for the safety net that helps poor, needy, and sick people?

The baby is here and he’s a wanted child.

Why are we supposed to worry about caring for him via taxpayer dollars? That’s what taxpayer dollars are for? Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, is all for sick and disabled people.

He was a wanted child by the mother who is dead (unless they are still keeping her alive for some unknown reason). His family likely do not want to see him suffer in life. He and his mother should have been left to the decisions of the family. Not Georgia of all states FCS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are these people excited for this going to also be excited for their taxes going to cover this baby's Medicaid and SSD for the next 80+ years? Considering the fact that the Right wants to gut Medicaid, I'm going to say no.

We have a medically fragile micro-preemie in my family. She was born at 25 weeks and weighed 1.2 lbs. She was in the NICU for 157 days. Each day in the NICU was basically $21k. Just her NICU stay alone clocked in at over $3 million dollars. That didn't include the 'others' like meds, care team, equipment, etc. That was just the amount for the NICU incubator. A hospital social worker worked with my sister to get my niece on Medicare. My sis and BIL had no idea she would even qualify because they have good jobs and private insurance. The social worker was amazing! She taught them so many things that they didn't know about medically fragile/disabled kids + Medicaid. Before she was born, they had no idea that Medicaid could be given to just 1 family member even if the family was well-off.

My niece is now 2 but she will never live a normal, traditional life. She has a trach-vent, which requires round-the-clock care. That's fully funded and provided by Medicaid. My sister's & BILs private insurance did NOT cover that, which is one thing the hospital social worker taught them. She also has CP, a seizure disorder, and other issues. Just one of her hospital stays for something minor like a cold can rack up a $500k bill.

I thought democrats were different than republicans because democrats want to help the poor, needy, and sick?

Aren’t democrats all for the safety net that helps poor, needy, and sick people?

The baby is here and he’s a wanted child.

Why are we supposed to worry about caring for him via taxpayer dollars? That’s what taxpayer dollars are for? Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, is all for sick and disabled people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had a preemie. He weighed 3lb, 14oz, at 32 weeks. He had a global developmental delay, needed extensive physical, occupational, feeding and speech therapy, has anaphylactic allergies to certain foods, ADHD and autism. All these issues increase with premature birth and low birth weight.

Just because some very lucky babies survive extremely premature births and low birth weights, doesn't mean they all survive; and the littlest, most fragile ones NEVER survive without lifelong issues. Chance will have lifelong issues if he survives.

The grandmother isn't lying. The hospital staff is not telling her what this baby will have to go through. The hospital staff would never lay it all out for new parents/grandparents! All they're telling her is that right now he's alive, and has a fighting chance of surviving tomorrow. Nothing beyond that.

You have to interpret these things correctly, PPs.

Citation needed for your diagnosis for a baby you have never laid eyes on? Are you his doctor? Are you a preemie doctor?

My son was born premature and is normal.

I'm a research scientist who worked in a NICU ward, and have read the literature on the subject, OP. My husband is a doctor.

There are plenty of preemies who have positive outcomes, I never said otherwise. But negative outcomes increase with the degree of prematurity and this preemie is at HIGH risk. Surely you don't dispute that. I am talking about statistics and probabilities. Surely you understand those concepts. None of us can predict the outcome of this particular infant, but what math tells us is that his chances of survival without any adverse effects are practically nil.

And this is before we get into discussions on the physiology of brain-dead mothers kept alive until their fetus has a chance of survival. I cannot comment on that, not having researched the topic. I am just talking about the health risks of micro-preemies in living mothers.

But this baby isn't just a preemie, he's a micro-preemie. They face even more challenges and complications.

This baby has a 48.7% chance of survival. He also has a chance greater than 96% that he will have severe lifelong medical complications.

The choice to provide lifelong care to a baby with severe complications was never given to the family. They have been forced into this situation and that is the greatest tragedy. Tax payers will spend billions over this baby's lifetime to keep it alive or if the GOP are successful in gutting medicare & medicaid, the family will go bankrupt trying to provide adequate care for him.

provide evidence and reputable links for your claims.

Lol it's almost cute how MAGA demands reputable sources and evidence for commonly accepted scientific fact, but they can be led around like sheep for a good conspiracy theory.

Someone says the earth is round and MAGA needs you to cite a source, but tell them Biden actually died and was replaced by AI, and no source needed. 😂

Anonymous wrote:Are these people excited for this going to also be excited for their taxes going to cover this baby's Medicaid and SSD for the next 80+ years? Considering the fact that the Right wants to gut Medicaid, I'm going to say no.

We have a medically fragile micro-preemie in my family. She was born at 25 weeks and weighed 1.2 lbs. She was in the NICU for 157 days. Each day in the NICU was basically $21k. Just her NICU stay alone clocked in at over $3 million dollars. That didn't include the 'others' like meds, care team, equipment, etc. That was just the amount for the NICU incubator. A hospital social worker worked with my sister to get my niece on Medicare. My sis and BIL had no idea she would even qualify because they have good jobs and private insurance. The social worker was amazing! She taught them so many things that they didn't know about medically fragile/disabled kids + Medicaid. Before she was born, they had no idea that Medicaid could be given to just 1 family member even if the family was well-off.

My niece is now 2 but she will never live a normal, traditional life. She has a trach-vent, which requires round-the-clock care. That's fully funded and provided by Medicaid. My sister's & BILs private insurance did NOT cover that, which is one thing the hospital social worker taught them. She also has CP, a seizure disorder, and other issues. Just one of her hospital stays for something minor like a cold can rack up a $500k bill.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had a preemie. He weighed 3lb, 14oz, at 32 weeks. He had a global developmental delay, needed extensive physical, occupational, feeding and speech therapy, has anaphylactic allergies to certain foods, ADHD and autism. All these issues increase with premature birth and low birth weight.

Just because some very lucky babies survive extremely premature births and low birth weights, doesn't mean they all survive; and the littlest, most fragile ones NEVER survive without lifelong issues. Chance will have lifelong issues if he survives.

The grandmother isn't lying. The hospital staff is not telling her what this baby will have to go through. The hospital staff would never lay it all out for new parents/grandparents! All they're telling her is that right now he's alive, and has a fighting chance of surviving tomorrow. Nothing beyond that.

You have to interpret these things correctly, PPs.

Citation needed for your diagnosis for a baby you have never laid eyes on? Are you his doctor? Are you a preemie doctor?

My son was born premature and is normal.

I'm a research scientist who worked in a NICU ward, and have read the literature on the subject, OP. My husband is a doctor.

There are plenty of preemies who have positive outcomes, I never said otherwise. But negative outcomes increase with the degree of prematurity and this preemie is at HIGH risk. Surely you don't dispute that. I am talking about statistics and probabilities. Surely you understand those concepts. None of us can predict the outcome of this particular infant, but what math tells us is that his chances of survival without any adverse effects are practically nil.

And this is before we get into discussions on the physiology of brain-dead mothers kept alive until their fetus has a chance of survival. I cannot comment on that, not having researched the topic. I am just talking about the health risks of micro-preemies in living mothers.

But this baby isn't just a preemie, he's a micro-preemie. They face even more challenges and complications.

This baby has a 48.7% chance of survival. He also has a chance greater than 96% that he will have severe lifelong medical complications.

The choice to provide lifelong care to a baby with severe complications was never given to the family. They have been forced into this situation and that is the greatest tragedy. Tax payers will spend billions over this baby's lifetime to keep it alive or if the GOP are successful in gutting medicare & medicaid, the family will go bankrupt trying to provide adequate care for him.

provide evidence and reputable links for your claims.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had a preemie. He weighed 3lb, 14oz, at 32 weeks. He had a global developmental delay, needed extensive physical, occupational, feeding and speech therapy, has anaphylactic allergies to certain foods, ADHD and autism. All these issues increase with premature birth and low birth weight.

Just because some very lucky babies survive extremely premature births and low birth weights, doesn't mean they all survive; and the littlest, most fragile ones NEVER survive without lifelong issues. Chance will have lifelong issues if he survives.

The grandmother isn't lying. The hospital staff is not telling her what this baby will have to go through. The hospital staff would never lay it all out for new parents/grandparents! All they're telling her is that right now he's alive, and has a fighting chance of surviving tomorrow. Nothing beyond that.

You have to interpret these things correctly, PPs.

Citation needed for your diagnosis for a baby you have never laid eyes on? Are you his doctor? Are you a preemie doctor?

My son was born premature and is normal.

I'm a research scientist who worked in a NICU ward, and have read the literature on the subject, OP. My husband is a doctor.

There are plenty of preemies who have positive outcomes, I never said otherwise. But negative outcomes increase with the degree of prematurity and this preemie is at HIGH risk. Surely you don't dispute that. I am talking about statistics and probabilities. Surely you understand those concepts. None of us can predict the outcome of this particular infant, but what math tells us is that his chances of survival without any adverse effects are practically nil.

And this is before we get into discussions on the physiology of brain-dead mothers kept alive until their fetus has a chance of survival. I cannot comment on that, not having researched the topic. I am just talking about the health risks of micro-preemies in living mothers.

But this baby isn't just a preemie, he's a micro-preemie. They face even more challenges and complications.

This baby has a 48.7% chance of survival. He also has a chance greater than 96% that he will have severe lifelong medical complications.

The choice to provide lifelong care to a baby with severe complications was never given to the family. They have been forced into this situation and that is the greatest tragedy. Tax payers will spend billions over this baby's lifetime to keep it alive or if the GOP are successful in gutting medicare & medicaid, the family will go bankrupt trying to provide adequate care for him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had a preemie. He weighed 3lb, 14oz, at 32 weeks. He had a global developmental delay, needed extensive physical, occupational, feeding and speech therapy, has anaphylactic allergies to certain foods, ADHD and autism. All these issues increase with premature birth and low birth weight.

Just because some very lucky babies survive extremely premature births and low birth weights, doesn't mean they all survive; and the littlest, most fragile ones NEVER survive without lifelong issues. Chance will have lifelong issues if he survives.

The grandmother isn't lying. The hospital staff is not telling her what this baby will have to go through. The hospital staff would never lay it all out for new parents/grandparents! All they're telling her is that right now he's alive, and has a fighting chance of surviving tomorrow. Nothing beyond that.

You have to interpret these things correctly, PPs.

Citation needed for your diagnosis for a baby you have never laid eyes on? Are you his doctor? Are you a preemie doctor?

My son was born premature and is normal.

I'm a research scientist who worked in a NICU ward, and have read the literature on the subject, OP. My husband is a doctor.

There are plenty of preemies who have positive outcomes, I never said otherwise. But negative outcomes increase with the degree of prematurity and this preemie is at HIGH risk. Surely you don't dispute that. I am talking about statistics and probabilities. Surely you understand those concepts. None of us can predict the outcome of this particular infant, but what math tells us is that his chances of survival without any adverse effects are practically nil.

And this is before we get into discussions on the physiology of brain-dead mothers kept alive until their fetus has a chance of survival. I cannot comment on that, not having researched the topic. I am just talking about the health risks of micro-preemies in living mothers.