The case of "Baby MB"

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 16 Mar 2006, 08:50

Hey,
I heard this story on the news yesterday. It was about the parents of a severely disabled baby (who is known only as "MB") - he has muscular atrophy (sp?) which causes almost total paralysis. The little guy cant breathe for himself, and eats food through a tube. The hospital where he is staying have said its' "cruel" to keep him alive, and the parents were fighting the hospitals right to turn the ventilator off that keeps him alive.
However, a court judge has ruled he should be kept alive. He said that the baby gained enough pleasure from life in order to outweigh the medical evidence of his condition.

What do you think? Should it be the parents or hospitals right to decide whether he lives or not?

tom2681 · Post by **tom2681** » 16 Mar 2006, 10:20

Anybody who can't "appreciate" life (is blind/mute/deaf/paralyzed) deserves (as in "earns the right") to choose whether he should live or die.
If he's too paralyzed to choose for himself, then death should be the only good choice.

In this case, I say death. No-one should live like this.

thelostdragon · Post by **thelostdragon** » 16 Mar 2006, 10:21

No. Nobody has the right to judge about life and death, even if a person is in severe pain etc.

Keung · Post by **Keung** » 16 Mar 2006, 10:30

I agree with LD.

Levi

tom2681 · Post by **tom2681** » 16 Mar 2006, 10:59

That's a crazy point of view IMO.

When life isn't worth living, death is a gift.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 16 Mar 2006, 12:17

The baby is only 19 months old or something, he cant decide for himself can he? I'd hate to live like that but if it is decided he should live, then so be it. However I don't think judges should make decisions like that?

The parents should be able to have the final say IMO. (The parents wanted him to stay alive BTW).
The baby is not blind or deaf (dont think so?), he can see/look and does respond to some things Tom.

tom2681 · Post by **tom2681** » 16 Mar 2006, 12:18

he can see/look and does respond to some things Tom.

Ah... that complicates things a bit.
Then... I honestly don't know.

BiscLimpkit · Post by **BiscLimpkit** » 16 Mar 2006, 12:21

I agree with LD.

No one should assume that this baby wants to die. We should not decide for him.

Let him live.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 16 Mar 2006, 12:21

OK, well I dont think he's blind anyway, I saw an interview with his parents on BBC News and they said they read him stories and play him music and stuff, and the baby will open his mouth or eyes (or try to), or look around when they play peepo with him

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 16 Mar 2006, 16:29

It's a horrendnous situation for any parent. But if the baby is NEVER going to improve its quality of life then I think the kindest act would be to switch the machines off. Heart-breaking.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 16 Mar 2006, 17:04

If he's going to be on life support till he dies I probably would have to agree Mark

I mean, he's never going to have a normal life. But how can one say his quality of life will "NEVER" improve?
It should be the parents who have the final say though, not a judge or hospital consultants.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 16 Mar 2006, 17:19

Parents should have the final say, BUT, they should listen to the experts' advice.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 16 Mar 2006, 17:35

True.

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 16 Mar 2006, 20:04

I think we should take out the brain of the kid, and put it in a little cyborg body...
Just like a modern-day astroboy...

Anyway... he can still see, smell, hear I guess, so he is alive and can enjoy some aspects of being alive. Obviously not as much as the rest of us, but the parents obviously arent ready to say goodbye to him yet, so they shouldnt take the kid away from them, as they feel there is still enough love in them to provide for the kid and care for him and make him feel special everyday by reading him stuff or whatever they do. Lots of kids dont have that much attention from their parents.

Let him live.

Personally, if it was ME who could hardly live, I'd probably think I'd be better of dead. But hell, I even have those feelings when I'm healthy, so my opinion on this isnt the most reliable.
If it was my kid and it still responded to me and it's mom and to sounds and voices and images etc, I would certainly want to keep it alive as well I think. Yeah it's going to be very very tough, for both the kid as well as the parents, but if there's love in that relationship, why would you break that up?

If you let it live you can always change your mind later. If you let it die, and you realised you made a mistake, it's too late.

gojensen · Post by **gojensen** » 17 Mar 2006, 08:34

What if the baby is in agony and just can't express it?

Wouldn't it then be torture from the parents to keep him/her alive?

And another thing is cost - are the parents paying for this or the state (through taxes)?

It's difficult, we had a similar case recently over here - though not with a baby, but with a 4-5 year old girl that had been in a "cataonic-like-coma" for over a year, and the docs wanted to shutdown the lifesupport... Unfortunately I can't for the life of me remember how - but the girl eventually died.

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 17 Mar 2006, 12:56

gojensen wrote:What if the baby is in agony and just can't express it?

Wouldn't it then be torture from the parents to keep him/her alive?

And another thing is cost - are the parents paying for this or the state (through taxes)?

It's difficult, we had a similar case recently over here - though not with a baby, but with a 4-5 year old girl that had been in a "cataonic-like-coma" for over a year, and the docs wanted to shutdown the lifesupport... Unfortunately I can't for the life of me remember how - but the girl eventually died.

Arent there ways (brainscan) available to check if someone is suffering from pains or something? I'm sure they would have checked if they werent sure, especially as it could have convinced the parents to let the kid die, if it was true!?

About the taxes. Cases like this are really the last thing I worry about when I'm paying my taxes. I WANT my taxes to be used for good (medical stuff, people having a good old day, etc etc, instead of my taxes being used for new jetfighters, big paychecks for ministers, big-ass projects that have no value at all except for status, etc etc.
If my tax-dollars could help let a kid live longer, and thus helping out the parents, I have no problems with that.

But it's a very very hard decision to make for all involved, I'm sure. It must be heartbreaking to see someone you love lying around in such a state. But as I said, if the kid isnt in any pain, can still enjoy certain aspects of life, and has the unconditional love from both parents, it isnt as sad as we think it is. Many kids grow up without loving parents. Should we kill those off as well

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 17 Mar 2006, 14:45

I'd rather be dead... I'm not being flippant. But a life hooked up to a fucking tube is no life at all. There's more to life than simply breathing and blinking.

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 17 Mar 2006, 15:00

Markgway wrote:I'd rather be dead... I'm not being flippant. But a life hooked up to a fucking tube is no life at all. There's more to life than simply breathing and blinking.

Maybe he can learn to read and read the finest literature? Maybe he can watch all the great movies and listen to the finest music? See the faces of his loving parents everyday? Hear them read stories?
Ofcourse, we all prefer mobilty and all our capabilities etc... but does that mean that someone who doesnt ahve those capabilities would prefer DEATH?

If ever something serious would happen to me, I'm pretty sure I'd consider suicide. No question about it. But this kid will grow up with these limitations, so it might learn to get pleasure from other things?

If it was my kid, I dont know yet what I would do. It's hard to judge. I think it would be very difficult to kill something you love so dearly when it isnt suffering, just limited in it's capabilities.

thelostdragon · Post by **thelostdragon** » 17 Mar 2006, 15:04

So what is life? Of course you feel that it is no life as you know better.

Man, you never know if you have to be attached to a tube forever. There have been many cases where doctors were simply wrong with all their diagnostics. A close friend of my father died a natural dead last year. I think about 15 years ago or so, doctors told him he'd live another 6 months maximum due to the progression of his cancer. Well, since then he regularly did check-ups and about 2 years later or so, there was no evidence in his body of any cancer ever.

Things DO happen which not even doctors can explain and the above is just one story of many.l I'm sure most of you will have heard of people who were born blind and one day they could actually see.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 17 Mar 2006, 16:25

However, one thing about the "interview" - 1) The parents couldnt be identified for legal reasons. 2) Their words had to be spoken by actors.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 17 Mar 2006, 16:35

Doctors aren't infallible, I know that. But the baby can't even breathe by itself. It seems cruel to make it grow up unable to live a life anything approaching normal. Sick, lying in a hospital, on the cusp of death. I'm sure if there was a reasonable chance for the baby the doctors would have said so.