What does everyone think of this

[Just Plain Ruff]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15730874/wid/11915773?GT1=8717

I don't know what to think. Sounds like good science behind it but I'm not sure if I agree.

discuss

[MedicRN]

....... bad URL ......

[Dustdevil]

....... bad subject line .......

[itku2er]

well this is just my opionion here and you what they say about that ....

I see where they are coming from, But I dont agree with it. I think that we are here to do one purpose whether its EMS NURSING OR BEING A DOCTOR......and that is to try to save a life no matter what. If we take the mentally that just because they are less than 22 weeks that they dont deserve to live then we are not doing our jobs. God decides who lives and who dies not the doctors not the nurses nor not the ems workers, we are his tools he uses to aid these people. To me if we dont give these kids a chance we might be killing the future President of the USA, or next Nobel Peace Prize winner. Then another thought occurs to me if this is ok then what if they decide that you cant use advanced procedures on trauma victums if they have a spinal cord injury? I think we should all do what is in our power and knowledge to save the ones we can reguardless of the age..

Just my 2 cents worth

terri

[JPINFV]

From what I read of this it does not seem like it is a unilateral decision of the physician to cease treatment. It is a joint decision between the parents and the physician with the recommendation that these patients who have a next to nill chance of recovery without major disabilities. It looks like it is similar to the recommendation to cease treatment of patients in a persistent vegetative state.

In terms of saving a life, I am not here to save a life. I am hear to abide by my patient's wishes. Normally the idea of life saving and medicine goes hand in hand, but people do fill out a DNR for a reason.

[Asysin2leads]

I never think applying cold numbers to health care decisions is a good idea. Nothing particularly mindblowing occurs between week 22 and week 23, it all depends on the state of the mother, the fetus, etc. That being said, I wish that the medical profession and people in general would reevaluate their stance on human development. I'm not religious, I won't criticize others beliefs, but my own personal one is that God never intended for an anacephalic baby to sit in an ICU hooked up to life support.

[itku2er]

From what I read of this it does not seem like it is a unilateral decision of the physician to cease treatment. It is a joint decision between the parents and the physician with the recommendation that these patients who have a next to nill chance of recovery without major disabilities. It looks like it is similar to the recommendation to cease treatment of patients in a persistent vegetative state.

In terms of saving a life, I am not here to save a life. I am hear to abide by my patient's wishes. Normally the idea of life saving and medicine goes hand in hand, but people do fill out a DNR for a reason.

This dont have anything to do with DNR's this is about babies that are born before 22 weeks gestation

DNR's are a different ballgame all together........

Terri

[Ridryder 911]

Interesting, I just finished a medical ethics class and we discussed this. Actually, if anyone has taken the new NRP class, this is discussed in the new curriculum for U.S. as well. One of the neonate NP was discussing the new NRP criteria.

Fetus < than 22 weeks, there is a VERY high chance that infant will be born blind, deaf, mentally retarded and then becoming vent dependent, then only to die in a few weeks to months. Yes, there are a few that does live on a vent .. and have reached the million dollar maximum claim if they have medicaid or insurance, then afterwards it goes to the family credit.

The main point NRP is getting to a give good informed decision to the family... all the risks as just described or "let nature take it course"... and allow the neonate to die and family be prepared for such. The resuscitation team then should be prepared for either decision.

R/r 911

[Lone Star]

Personally, having been born around the 24th week of gestation, I'm glad that they weren't considering this move in 1964. I was born at 4 pounds/5 ounces and had more than my share of difficulties. This was the first time that doctors 'lied' to my parents. I wasn't supposed to live past 5 years of age and even if I did, they didn't give me much of a fighting chance to survive. Now, at 42, I guess I pulled a fast one on the doctors!

I personally think that if the fetus can survive outside the womb at that point in gestation, then the doctors should fully explain the possible effects of the situation, but not be quite so ready to just 'pull the plug' and stand back and hope the end comes quickly. Just my thoughts on the subject.

[windsong]

I feel bad for the parents having to face that challenge but also for the position the doctor's are in, it's not an easy task for them.

I kinda agree and I dont, but what does the world think having to fund another child with mental retardation, or the poor child who would like to be normal and cant.

We all hope when our kids are born that they have 10 fingers/toes, healthy as such but that is never the case.