I'm not implying that at all. I just didn't go into that definition
for the sake of brevity. The light hearted comment about turning 18
meant that every child takes a tremendous amount of "life support" to
raise. but if you insist on a definition: I believe that any infant
who is alive at the time of onset of labor (whether natural or
surgical) is entitled to what ever life support we have to offer. In
some cases like ancephaly there are hard choices for parents to
make. But I am sharing my views and not writing a policy that will
be used to make life and death decisions beyond my own family.
Mindy the Artist
On Mar 27, 2009, at 9:03 AM, [email protected] wrote:
Mindy, by that logic, a baby who needed life support at birth would
not be entitled to it. I've known many families of children born
prematurely who needed a great deal of help at first, but who grew
and thrived with help, including ventilators.
Barbara H.
http://barbarah.wordpress.com/
In a message dated 3/25/2009 8:27:24 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:
My experience also led me to the conclusion that a life that
cannot survive outside the mother is not entitled to citizenship
rights equal to that of the mother until it is mature enough to
survive once the umbilical cord is cut (or has turned 18, which
ever comes first).
Mindy the Artist
Free Credit Report and Score Tracking! Get it Now for $0 at
CreditReport.com.
