jump to navigation

Hmmm…..Mother Decides to Carry Baby with “No Brain” to Term to Donate Organs March 6, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, disaster, error, family, General Catholic, horror, sadness, secularism, Society.

While much of the world is heaping praise on an Oklahoma mom who has determined to carry what doctors have determined is a child with anencephaly (virtually no brain development) to term, the reason she has specified for doing so gives pause.  Her intent in carrying the child to term is to donate her organs to people in need.

There are several important aspects that the article quoted below leaves out.  It is true that most children afflicted with this disorder die shortly after birth, if they make it to birth.  But a growing number have lived for months or even years with this condition, defying all medical logic, such as it is as this time. The other salient factor is that to donate organs like a heart or liver – which would seem to be too small in this case to be much use to all but the youngest patients – the donor must be killed in the process of organ removal.

What the article does not tell us is how the family plans to proceed if the baby is born alive – which it is expected to be – and does not immediately die of its disorder.  It reads as if they plan on letting doctors dismember their child alive in order to get at the organs.  I pray this is not the case, but since the parents have apparently already determined to donate organs, and if the baby dies before the organs are removed it will defeat the stated purpose, it seems as if the baby will be whisked away to an operating room to be harvested for parts shortly after birth.  Since I don’t know this to be the case – the coverage all seems to stem from the same fluffy, incomplete article – I won’t engage in speculation as to what the parents plan to do if death is not eminent for their daughter after birth, but I will note that killing a baby or any person for the purpose of getting at their organs, even to ostensibly save other lives, is morally repugnant and reduces some humans – even if this is not the intent – to virtual farm animals groomed for parts to benefit others.

The article:

Keri Young feels the kicks, has the hiccups and can hear her daughter’s heartbeat, but unlike most mothers, she won’t get to see her daughter grow up.

Her unborn daughter Eva has anencephaly and doesn’t have a brain.

Keri Young and her husband Royce, of Oklahoma City, have shared heartbreaking details of the pregnancy in a series of posts on social media.

At 19 weeks, they found out their daughter would only have 24 hours to live at birth if they decided to keep her. [This is not true in every case.  As I said, a growing number of babies with this affliction have lived even for several years, and brought great joy to their families.]

Faced with terrible options, Keri said they decided to continue with the pregnancy to full term to give other children a chance at life. [Even if that means denying their own child it’s own chance?]

I don’t write this to further hurt a family going through something unimaginable.  Having had to confront the mortality of one of my own children recently, I have some inkling of how incredibly painful this must be.

And it’s certainly preferable that the parents chose to at least carry the baby to term, rather than have it murdered in the womb as many people would prefer.

Nevertheless, given that anencephaly is not necessarily an automatic death sentence (and keeping in mind that we only have a tiny, distorted picture of the case), and given that donation of vital organs is……..this is really not something to be praised but to be at least questioned, pending further information, if not outright condemned.  Doctors make mistakes.  Babies have stunned doctors with “impossible” recoveries or by at least living for periods of time medical science says could not occur.

Decades of murdering millions of babies and treating people materialistically to get at their good parts when their lives are in jeopardy or they are in a persistent coma, etc., has played a key role in the broader devaluing of human life in our culture today.  This post may well be seen as harsh or mean-spirited, but it is simply an attempt to call to mind the Truth Christ has revealed, that we must respect and do all we can to support human life from conception to natural death, no matter what the “experts” say about the futility of such support. The organ donation process – for vital organs – is wholly and integrally opposed to this respect, and exists on the basis of what often turn out to be flawed medical opinions.  And yet we see how far respect for human life and a proper understanding of what that respect entails in the effusive praise that is being directed at this family, which may have morally-upright intentions, but also may not.

I pray this couple gives their baby the full chance for life God intends her to have.  I cannot imagine having my child carved up into parts while still alive, no matter how great the perceived benefit to others might be nor how grim their prognosis may be.



1. Faith of Our Fathers - March 7, 2017

Sir I do not wish to comment on the poor child but on organ replacement and donation. To me this has ( unless it’s a living person donating a kidney say to a brother) always been a bit of a dark side of medicine. O I know that if it were me tomorrow who was waiting desperately for an organ then it’s probably maybe a different angle I would look at it . Remember the song -Am Looking Through Gary Gilmores Eyes–Having recently had a very minor eye complaint it’s probably the thing I would hate most to lose . Where I inline for a Cornea transplant when he was executed would I have taken his eyes. My answer would probably have been Definitely. Would it have been morally wrong to do so again I would have to say Definitely.

2. The Lord's Blog - March 7, 2017

Reblogged this on Jean'sBistro2010's Blog and commented:

3. Baseballmomof8 - March 7, 2017

Just do not like this organ donation thing… I’ve mentioned before that the lawyer kid (insurance defense- lots of vehicle deaths) has seen way too many situations where the victim was “harvested” while not yet “at room temperature ” as it were. He suggests strongly that folks not designate themselves as donors.

4. Canon212 Update: For Lent, Pay No Attention to FrancisChurch! Your Nothing Opinion Doesn’t Matter Anyway – The Stumbling Block - March 7, 2017


5. dthy - March 9, 2017

There’s problems with organ donation in general. They can’t take vital organs from a deceased corpse, they have to keep them alive. Too many brain dead people have revived before their organs were harvested and reported that they were aware of everything going on, just unable to communicate. These people declared “brain dead” are not completely dead, can still hear and feel pain. That’s the physical problems. And in the spiritual sense, our bodies are temples of the Holy Ghost, not meant to be harvested and used by others. Harvesting is a farm operation, we need to limit the farming operations to plants and animals. Human bodies should be treated with dignity and properly buried. To bury the dead is one of the corporal works of mercy.

Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: