Blog Widget by LinkWithin

Move to Amend Barbaric UK Premature Birth Law

20 comments | 1:59 am | top |

baby Jayden, 21 weeks, 5 days
Baby Jayden was born halfway through pregnancy at 21 weeks and 5 days old. Despite the doctors' declaration that the child would be born dead with his skin peeling off, young Jayden was instead born alive, healthy - albeit extremely premature. Devestatingly for Jayden and his parents, UK law states that babies under 22 weeks are "unviable" and therefore not eligible to receive assistance if born alive. After two hours of life, and refused basic medical assistance, baby Jayden passed away. His heart-broken mother Sarah shares her story here.

Sarah has set up a Facebook group, Justice for Baby Jayden which has over 260,000 members calling for a change to the barbaric law that allowed this attrocity to take place.

The Daily Mail reports,

"When he was born, he put out his arms and legs and pushed himself over," said Miss Capewell.
"A midwife said he was breathing and had a strong heartbeat and described him as a 'little fighter.'"
"I kept asking for the doctors but the midwife said, 'They won't come and help, sweetie. Make the best of the time you have with him.'


baby Jayden's mother Sarah, 23
Are you disgusted? I am. This tragic case is ultimately no worse than the 46,000,000 other abortions which will be committed place this year. However what makes this case really stand out is that the (a) the law is terrible, and (b) the doctors were so heartless as to stand by and refuse to attempt to help the young child. Sarah makes mention of one little girl, Amillia Taylor who is perfectly healthy after being born in Florida in 2006 at 21 weeks and six days - just one day older than her poor son

I acknowledge the value in debating the morality or necessity for legalised abortion. However it is absolutely crucial that all those taking part in the debate have an objective understanding of what it is that we are talking about. Was baby Jayden to have been killed within his mother's womb, advocates for legalised abortion would not have batted an eye-lid. However when his environment changes (he is placed outside the womb), suddenly the story that he was killed by being refused essential medical attention becomes an international story. In the video below, Scott Klusendorf explains the SLED theory - well worth a watch.


hat-tip: Jill Stanek

Labels: , ,

20 Comments:

Blogger Simeon said...

That just makes me feel disgusted and Angry.

How can it be right to have a law which says its Ok to leave a child to die?

8:34 am, September 10, 2009 
Anonymous Rachel T said...

Oh, thats aweful! I started to read thinking it was one of those nice stories where a lil babe is born really prem but survives anyway. Then I realized...:(
How can people be so heartless!? I dont thinks there is words to describe how horrific it is! :( The poor mother.

11:14 am, September 10, 2009 
Anonymous Rebecca Rosser said...

I am truly horrified by the doctors. Even if the law exists, shouldn't human emotion come into play and make you WANT to help this wee little man. I feel absolutely sorry for his mum. To know your baby survived at such a young age and then refused aid, is absolutley disgusting. My family and I send our love and hope that something can be done to correct this so someone else doesn't have to experience this trauma.

7:11 pm, September 10, 2009 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Andrew what do you know about prem babies? You have no knowledge at all of prem babies. At 21 weeks and 5 days there is no such thing as healthy. As the parent of a baby born a 25 weeks, I can tell you that you are wrong. Developmentally this baby probably was not viable. You yet again let your beliefs and lack of life experience show Andrew. You clearly have never set foot in a neo-natal unit at all. You clearly still are an ignorant little man Andrew. Do you know the decisions that have to be made at that age of birth, do you really think that the 22 week mark is wrong? What quality of life would a child have or would your prayers help lol grow up!

10:01 pm, September 14, 2009 
Blogger Andy Moore said...

define "not viable"

1:49 pm, September 15, 2009 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Are honestly that ignorant of what viable at 21 weeks and 5 days gestation is? How about the development of the lungs to start with, it is unable to breathe on it's own, it has to be ventilated. It runs the risk of severe infection, if infact it can be ventilated. I ask again Andrew have you ever been into a Neo natel ICU at all? My son spent 67 days in ICU and you clearly have no knowledge of viable other than your belief structure of viable. Go find out medically what the long term outlook medically for a baby of that gestation is and you might pull your article. Sorry you really are mis informed.

5:02 pm, September 15, 2009 
Blogger Andy Moore said...

I haven't been in a neo-natel ICU. Neither have I been in Zimbabwe, however I will not hesitate to speak up for the oppressed people in that country.

You said the child was unable to breathe, however the midwife said "he was breathing" - see above.

I agree, all extremely premature babies require a great deal of assistance throughout the first few months of their lives, however is this a just reason to kill the child? Is killing the child the correct solution to the child's problems?

I did ask that you define what you mean by the use of the phrase "not viable" - sorry, I probably wasn't clear enough, but what I meant was, could you explain what properties make an unborn baby viable as opposed to being non-viable.

Cheers.

10:11 pm, September 15, 2009 
Anonymous Mum said...

Viable? Everyone of us was viable from conception. A baby becomes unviable when it dies/miscarries. If a woman chooses a method/drug which kills her baby then she is guilty. That's why there are so many warnings given to any woman who may be pregnant.

4:57 am, September 16, 2009 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The baby was not unborn, it was born pre-term. You confuse abortion with huge developmental issues, eg not actually being fullterm. Without a detailed medical prognosis how can you really say it is murder. You dissapoint me Andrew, it would seem to me that as per usual you lack any real knowledge and continue the same old tired and emotive statements without any practical knowledge. I ask anyone else on here if in fact they have any actual knowledge of pre-term baby care or survval. At 22 weeks the survival rate is about 4%. Moderate to severe disability at birth is over 50%. The ability to actually keep a baby alive at that gestation is extremely unlikely. The list could go on and on etc. But tell me yet again what you or your other commenters actually know about it, other than emotive and belief based comments. Viable from conception is a matter of belief only without intervention from a sustainable date during gestation. At any point prior to 22 weeks a baby is not viable without human intervention. For people who have to make real decisions in real time based on best advice in a life and death situation, your blog looks pretty sad to be honest.

You are not even a parent Andrew, you base your comments on your faith and I wonder what you would do if faced as a parent in a similar situation. If you had a pet that was in pain with only a 4% survival probability and was very likely be severely disabled and unable to function, would you take the best advice of the vet and put that pet to sleep humanely, or fight to put that animal through agony based on your own beliefs Andrew? Remember that pre term baby was not aborted.

8:01 am, September 16, 2009 
Blogger Andy Moore said...

Anonymous, a baby prior to 2 years is not viable without human intervention.

Euthanising a pet is a different issue altogether from allowing a premature baby to die by itself, without assistance.

I absolutely see what you're saying about the low survival rates for premmies, however is this any reason just to give up on them? If I had a 1% chance to save someone I loved, I would do it.

You say I'm making emotive statements and that my argument is faith-based - please point out these aspects.

9:50 am, September 16, 2009 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well Andrew were you aware that it is the 23 week mark in New Zealand. Now what really do you know about Prem babies? Prior to 2 years makes no sense medically?? Andrew you are a 21 year old who really has no life experience. You have not had a real relationship with a woman and have never ever been eligable to affected by an abortion. You make no secret of your faith and opinions Andrew. You clearly have no idea about any medical aspect of premature babies yet are very quick to pull in this story to further comment on abortion. You clearly lack any humanity in this situation. Do you honestly think that your home schooling has given you the tools to add a valuable and informed opinion an this situation?. You are not even in the game Andrew, all very 1 dimensional.





Because of your faith

7:04 pm, September 17, 2009 
Blogger Andy Moore said...

I'm sorry for you Anonymous. You appear well-practiced with the personal attacks - attacking the messenger rather than the message, and continually avoiding my pointed questions.

Prior to two years does make sense medically. Some extreme anti-lifers have stated that abortions should be permissible up to one or two years after birth. Just as a baby within the womb requires an ongoing supply of food and other nutrients through his mother, a born baby will die if she does not receive food and care from her parents. Its simple: take someone (you and me included) out of their natural environment, place them in an environment which they are not suited for: and they will die.

5:47 am, September 18, 2009 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Andrew I ask these questions not as a personal attack but to ask what knowledge you have. Knowledge of a subject you are providing the mssage about would seem to be important. you put yourself out there by having this blog and having an opinion at the far end of the spectrum.

I am not asking about "extreme anti-lifers" and abortions after birth. What world do you immerse yourself in Andrew? I am asking about premature babies the subject of this article and changing the 22 week mark in th UK.

But it would seem to me and the people who would have a clear and rational thought process you use what you can to push your own agenda on what ever. Have you ever been in an abortion clinic? Have you ever been in the position to have to make decisions like this? Why not just answer these questions and and not take it personally.

What makes you think you have the right to pass judgement Andrew when you as the messenger you are not personally involved. At least that lady in the UK has the life experience to have that opinion and I applaud her. i also have experince in that arena having had to make real life and death deciions for a small life. How about you Andrew have you, do you feel you have the right to be a messenger on something you have no actual knowledge on?

Knowledge is the enemy of faith Andrew and when it it comes to real situations that actually affect a life, I think I will stick to the real world. So if having been there and done that makes me practised at attacks,so be so

6:43 am, September 18, 2009 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

wow u guys this isn't about u its about this babyboy thats no longer lives why do people always have to comment about shit with there own belives about abortion and bullshit this woman put her story on her to be heard and so people can understand her story in hopes that someone will make her feel better and all u assholes can do is fight about ur bullshit keep ur comment to urselfs and stay off her page ur fucking rude think about the this young lady that no longer has her baby and is hurting really badly isn't of thinking about ur selfs

2:02 pm, October 10, 2009 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

instead ***

2:04 pm, October 10, 2009 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

that is so fukiing stupid

10:34 am, November 14, 2009 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

all you people are annoying. these idiot so called doctors let an infant DIE! they committed MURDER by not doing a damn thing for that baby, anyone involved in that delivery should be fired! they dont deserve the title doctor or nurse, they are all a bunch of fucking dumb-asses! if that was my baby i would have demanded them to do their jobs and try to save my baby before i declared them non-viable and murdered their stupid asses! and all you people can do is sit around an argue if the baby was even viable! what the fuck! the baby was alive at birth therefor he WAS VIABLE! the only thing that makes a baby not viable is if they are ALREADY dead!

10:17 am, November 27, 2009 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

so true ......its about a baby have a fucking heart everyone should be given a chance what makes us so different...let me guess because were viable

8:23 pm, June 24, 2010 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Many of these infants are a burden to society and drain the medical system. It is the rare infant that premature that grows up "normal". They did the right thing.

4:49 pm, November 02, 2010 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I worked in a NICU ( neonatal intensive care) for 17 years. Knowing what I do, I would not even go to the hospital if I was in labor at 24 weeks. The poor infants have so many issues and are frequently devasting to relationships. I saw more divirces resulting from the extremely premature infant than you could imagine. Generally, if they survived the had many health issues. Blindness, deaf, learning dissabilities, hydrocephalus, GI problems...and so forthe. I think if someone wants to "save" a fetus this age they should pay for it themself. The cost is astronomical, in the millions! Not to mention the care for disabilities after.

4:53 pm, November 02, 2010 

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

blog design by equipbiz | this blog is best viewed with Firefox. Remember: Friends don't let friends use Internet Exporer. :)