BC Sextuplets....

[ZipaDeeDooDah]

Story here:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070131.wsextuplets0131/BNStory/Front/home

2 of the 6 babies born in BC have died. Premature babies often require blood transfusions, but the parents of these sextuplets have refused blood transfusions on religious grounds (they are Jehovah's Witnesses). The government has now stepped in and ordered emergency blood transfusions for 3 of the 4 remaining babies.

 

[PaulaSue]

IT is so sad. To not do all to take care of them.

 

[phillybeth]

So it's against God to abort or accept blood transfusions, fine. Then shouldn't you also accept God's will that you be childless, and not use technology to conceive?

I find it hypocritical that some folks pick and choose what part of God's will they will follow.

 

[ZipaDeeDooDah]

I agree - if the mother underwent fertility treatment then it is very hypocritical of them

 

[Jeanny]

So it's against God to abort or accept blood transfusions, fine. Then shouldn't you also accept God's will that you be childless, and not use technology to conceive?

I find it hypocritical that some folks pick and choose what part of God's will they will follow.

ITA!!!! They follow what they want to follow!!

 

[DisneyAddict_M]

I was raised as a JW and was always told that IVF isn't allowed.

 

[Sheree Bobbins]

The last newcast I saw (a few minutes ago) said the family is going to sue the government. Apparently some procedure must be followed for the government to step in, and they stepped in too soon. It's amazingly quiet about the sextuplets, or should I say quadruplets.

 

[Beca]

Didn't the parents know that when you have multiples, blood transfusions were often required?? I would think the fertility clinic would've warned them of all the possibilities associated with multiples.

That is SOOO sad!!!

 

[Lachesis00]

I agree. I know someone who did IVF but didn't believe in some medical practices (that could be life saving). VERY religious (which is fine). I never could comprehend her way of thinking.

Most of her religious views did not jive with going the IVF route. I am trying to think exactly what at the time bugged me, what didn't correlate. I remember it seemed to be more then one thing and it baffled me.
The God will provide in pretty much any area but they needed help with conceiving both children. Or if it is good or bad, positive or negative, it is God's will. I just didn't understand it. And when questioning her, she got quite hostile and defensive, but never explained her reasonings. I truly was curious. I was not trying to tick her off.

So it's against God to abort or accept blood transfusions, fine. Then shouldn't you also accept God's will that you be childless, and not use technology to conceive?

I find it hypocritical that some folks pick and choose what part of God's will they will follow.

 

[ZipaDeeDooDah]

I was raised as a JW and was always told that IVF isn't allowed.

I would have thought so too, although we don't know for sure that the woman had IVF - the family has chosen to remain anonymous and no one will confirm that IVF was involved. (Although it is highly likely).

 

[ZipaDeeDooDah]

The last newcast I saw (a few minutes ago) said the family is going to sue the government. Apparently some procedure must be followed for the government to step in, and they stepped in too soon. It's amazingly quiet about the sextuplets, or should I say quadruplets.

From what I understand, the doctors didn't get a court order for the first 2 emergency blood transfusions (but did for the 3rd baby). Maybe the parents are suing for the first 2 transfusions?

I agree, it has been very quiet about the babies - too quiet.

 

[helenabear]

I would have thought so too, although we don't know for sure that the woman had IVF - the family has chosen to remain anonymous and no one will confirm that IVF was involved. (Although it is highly likely).

In all honesty, IVF most likely was not used. IVF usually only puts in 2-4 eggs at most at at time. Some will not do more than 2. It is most likely that drugs were used alone.

Of course I am not a doc, but this is how I understand IVF. They do retrieve the eggs and then implant after fertilization.

The drugs alone will just cause the ovaries to release more and that is usually the cause of the multiples beyond two when dealing with infertility.

However yes, I find it hypocritical to be for going against God's will and seeking out unnatural ways to procreate and then being anti blood transfusion. Doesn't work both ways IMO.

I have no issue with someone being for infertility treatments, or for against blood transfusions, but I find this to be a bit sad.

 

[luvwinnie]

I read they do allow fertility DRUGS, so maybe they did not have IVF?

 

[RachelEllen]

At least here, there is no need for a court order if a baby will die without the transfusion. It's covered under emergency care. Parents don't have the unlimited right to refuse life saving treatment for their child.

 

[ZipaDeeDooDah]

In all honesty, IVF most likely was not used. IVF usually only puts in 2-4 eggs at most at at time. Some will not do more than 2. It is most likely that drugs were used alone.

Of course I am not a doc, but this is how I understand IVF. They do retrieve the eggs and then implant after fertilization.

The drugs alone will just cause the ovaries to release more and that is usually the cause of the multiples beyond two when dealing with infertility.

However yes, I find it hypocritical to be for going against God's will and seeking out unnatural ways to procreate and then being anti blood transfusion. Doesn't work both ways IMO.

I have no issue with someone being for infertility treatments, or for against blood transfusions, but I find this to be a bit sad.

You're right, I should have specified that most likely some kind of fertility treatment was used, not necessarily just IVF.

I totally agree with everything else you said too.

 

[ZipaDeeDooDah]

I read they do allow fertility DRUGS, so maybe they did not have IVF?

Interesting, I wonder why the drugs are allowed but IVF is not?

 

[ZipaDeeDooDah]

At least here, there is no need for a court order if a baby will die without the transfusion. It's covered under emergency care. Parents don't have the unlimited right to refuse life saving treatment for their child.

One would hope that is the case here too.

 

[ElizaB39]

Interesting, I wonder why the drugs are allowed but IVF is not?

Hmmm, maybe because taking a drug (orally?) is not considered medical intervention, but the procedures with IVF are? Don't know, now I am curious.

 

[momof3disneyholics]

I cannot believe that a parent would really refuse a treatment that would save their child. I had a talk with a JW over blood transfusions one time and they really believe that blood transfusions will not save your life.

 

[Laura]

Just a reminder to people to donate blood. If you're able, please do so. This just shows that donating blood DOES save a life.