under 24 weeks not given a chance??

[mommy43]

after having read a couple of storys of babies under 24 weeks surviving n growing to be healthy babies i have started to wonder why not all these babies are given that chance i know they are not considered viable but if they are born fighting breathing its so wrong they are not helped is it not?? my daughter was born at 27weeks 2lb 4oz nearly 16yrs ago n given a 50/50 chance there were days when i looked at her n thought will she make it she fought a hole in the heart a blood infection for wich she had to be isolated n many other bumps along the way but she fought n is part from deafness thought to be caused by her prematuraty is fit n healthy surely things have changed enough to at least give them that chance or is there something im missing

 

[ALI]

You are absolutely right , and because it is tied in with the legal abortion limit, the abortion limit needs to be lowered from the current 24 weeks.

we know babies are viable at 22 weeks and have survived and grown to be perfectly healthy but maybe there are arguments for it to be lower even that that, that is for an expert to decide .

Nadien Dorries a conservative MP brought a motion last year for the limit to be lowered to either 22 or 20 weeks , two votes were held in Parliament one for each but the majority of mp's voted against it in each case . Their argument was that babies are not generally viable under 24 weeks and so few survive it did not justify the limit being lowered. The 24 week limit was set in 1990 in the UK, in Europe the limit is 12 weeks.

Surely there have been enough cases of babies surviving at 22/23 to justify a cut to at least 22 or 20 weeks. Who knows how more would be saved with immediate treatment, andtehcnology has advanced since then


I think the MP's were probably more passionate in debating/voting against their expenses being made public !!.

 

[mommy43]

and so few survive it did not justify the limit being lowered.

to me thats like putting value on life just one survival would justify it it just seems so wrong i cant imagine how heart breaking it must be to see ur baby born breathing or making some effort n not be helped at all because of the law thats 19yrs old

 

[MUMOF5]

The law is so wrong on this issue, It sickens me that unwanted babies at 24 weeks can be aborted and much wanted babies born a couple of weeks earlier are left to die! Where are the ethics in that??!!

 

[K&H]

The law is so wrong on this issue, It sickens me that unwanted babies at 24 weeks can be aborted and much wanted babies born a couple of weeks earlier are left to die! Where are the ethics in that??!!

I second that. x

 

[DizzyMoo]

I agree the that the gestation for abortion needs to be reduced & that yes the viable age should also be reduced. I think a lot of the concern around this is how well a childs life will be from being born so premature if you get me, There are obvious medical problems in a high percentage of babies born so early so this is taken into account too i guess. Of course some babies astound everyone & do superb.

Like with alot of things progress changes things & these things take time. I'm sure with constant petitions from people asking the age to be reduced will eventually get noted & granted.

 

[miel]

you mean if a baby is born breathing or with a little heart that his working before 24 weeks ? the doctors just stand there doing nothing ?

how alarming and shameful ...

 

[3 girlies]

there is a government petition asking for the law to be changed so that every baby born showing signs of life should be given the chance to live, i will find the link.

 

[3 girlies]

ok heres the link...

https://petitions.number10.gov.uk/justice4jayden/

 

[mommy43]

thanks ive signed

 

[Mumof42009]

I think its so unfair how people can still be allowed to abort a baby when they can survive at 24 weeks and less something needs to be done. I hope it does get lowered and they help more babies to live, i also think alot more research needs to be done to why babies are born premature i have had 3 now and mine was down to placenta abruptions which happen without any signs apart from i just bleed and dont stop.

 

[morri]

Is the 24 weeks also applying for perfecly healthy fetusi?
The legal barrier here is 12 weeks (, but if the fetus is very badly disabled or not able to live at all you can do it in 5 th months still too. )

(thats though is easieer said then done, I have read in a magazine that there is a couple whose son was missing the part that is connecting the brainsperes and thus would be badly disabled, since they live in bavaria though they couldnt get this done because there is an unwritten laws within the bavarian doctors not to do any late abortions)(thats because they are catholic there)

 

[toseland13]

i have also signed

 

[charliebear]

I too have signed

 

[kit603]

I have also signed

 

[AlwaysPraying]

I just have to interject about late term abortions. I know that 99% of late term abortions are due to severe and mostly fatal genetic and formation issues. Meaning, that during the 18 - 20 week ultrasound a fatal issue is found. Fatal meaning that the child has no chance to live, that they will pass away within the first few days, weeks of life the whole while undergoing severe and complicated surgeries. Many of these complications can cause permanent lifelong mental ******ation where the child cannot suck, therefor needs to be fed through a feeding tube in the nose, they cannot lift their head, roll over smell, see or speak - BUT will be "alive". This is what those late term abortions are about. For ex. if you get a later ultrasound at 21 weeks and find an issue, they will follow with blood work and another ultrasound at 22 weeks, then they will recommend an amnio at 23 weeks, results at 24 weeks. If the results come in with devastating answers, they could be left with a child who has some or all of these health issues. Of course, the right to choose is complicated and severe, but I think it needs to be stated why these things are an option.

As for "healthy" spontaneous early birth babies before 24 weeks? That's a good question. I think it's because the intervention needed to get this child to survive is incredibly drastic and can also result in long term severe mental and physical issues. Many of which are not survivable past the first year of life. To intervene on a baby who will inevidably succumb to their illness seems cruel in my eyes. Now, I don't know how many survive and how many don't with very early labour, but to my understanding the ones that don't are not born alive or pass within moments of birth. Many of the physical parts of the body aren't finished developing and that can restrict ongoing life at that point, if the kidneys / lungs aren't well enough developed, there is nothing they can do to keep that child alive. That's why they do steroid injections pre birth to try to fast track the development, but if it doesn't happen in time, then there is nothing they can do after the fact.

Obviously this is close to my heart. I only wish every baby was born alive well and healthy at 40 weeks, but isn't always the way. I lost my boy at 15 weeks due to a fatal genetic issue that would ensure he would live a maximum of 1 year with severe mental ******ation and the total inability to breath, suck, see, smell or roll over during that time. I didn't want him to be kept alive by any means due to this condition, to me that was a cruel fate he was dealt and letting him pass in his own time was the will of the way. If they told me that legally they had to intervene would only result in a long year of total devastation for everyone involved, and him passing from a heart attack because he only had three chambers instead of four.