Dear Professor, I want to continue with She interrupted a speech on the need for resuscitation fetuses survived a forced abortion without parental consent.
She really believes that we should always do it, whatever was the reason that has led parents to make the painful decision to prevent the life you want your son?
I take this opportunity to talk about a disgusting deception perpretato ricoveratasi against another woman the same day when I was admitted to the Centre to direct you to an abortion "therapeutic."
This young woman that I had already got to know during the two days prior to our hospital during the investigations of the ritual, had taken the decision to abort a child in an embryonic state with a disease that prevented him from the formation of facial bones. Her gynecologist told her that this condition was incompatible with life and furthermore by continuing the pregnancy the baby would suffer when the amniotic fluid would enter the face, destroying the tissue. The latter information is? When
as a last step we went to a psychiatrist she then told me they had no need of psychiatric disorder to abort because the baby she was carrying was incompatible with life. And then that had sent him to a psychiatrist do? To receive a psychological preparation for abortion, which was not considered appropriate to give to me despite my own, on a fetus, it was more traumatic? In summary then
Cristina, the young woman Montecorvino near Battipaglia (Sa), first of all did not know that for her psychiatric evaluation was necessary not simply because his action was required on an embryo, not because it is estimated that this Once word had not given birth to the possibility of independent life. This woman did not realize that his was not a therapeutic abortion and in any case had not understood that "treatment" of this type of voluntary terminations of pregnancy, is not intended to protect the child from suffering in the womb or out of it . It certainly is in the hospital on the fifth floor you that the other doctors around the building, we're careful not to let them understand.
Now the problem is that even what he had told her gynecologist about the incompatibility of the condition of the child with life, is true. Sure, it probably varies from case to case, but in the States about six years ago was born and is still alive and kicking ... more or less, a little girl with this same disease. At the small Julianna Wetmore is absent 30/40% of the bones of the face, because it has been called "the little girl without a face." His mouth but lacks the upper jaw do not need to talk about it to eat. Has the nose or a species, but not intended to alert the smells. He sketches of ears and hearing is therefore also affected. You see, but as seen as not having the housing cavities for the eyes, they are placed a bit 'oblique in what should be a face? For the rest, however, Julianna, fed through a hole in the throat by a probe, is a child of normal intelligence, walk, play, go to the beach and at school this year and was also enrolled in dance. Of course her face looks monstrous, but he has two parents and a sister a little larger than practically live for her. I never had the courage to give birth to a creature who at the age of two years had already been fifteen of the 30 interventions discussed so far, but obviously the suffering caused to her mother to her daughter the consequences of their selfishness (the parents are very Catholic) do not make mad with grief as I believe it would be for me if I decided to give birth to a child who never would have grown emotionally, hoping they would survive in this world where life is difficult for anyone. So I wonder if Cristina, also very Catholic (and contrarissima voluntary abortion per se) was aware of the history of Julianna, who suffers from the same disease his son, have also decided to abort it? Cristina was also her first pregnancy and therefore more motivated to have a child who he was.
Reasoning by contradiction, because the condition from which above is first diagnosed by ultrasound when it is still possible to have an abortion on an embryo, whether the abortion had been done on a fetus, this fetus had survived, would be considered equally legitimate resuscitation enforced without the consent of the mother (if it were was conscious of the real possibility of survival of the son born at term)?
Does not it seem pretty clear that in both cases: my resuscitation forced without my consent on an abortifacient affected by Down syndrome, and the deception that has been victim Cristina so Catholic that otherwise would never have agreed to abort her son for so much suffering, however, you may not pare che possano essere 2 casi speculari in cui è stato travisato del tutto lo spirito della 194 sull’aborto terapeutico? A chi è diretta in questi casi la “terapia”, a me che come madre ho più diritti rispetto al mio feto o embrione, o al bambino sulla cui sorte vogliono decidere gli altri, secondo le personali convinzioni, ginecologi o neonatologi che siano?
Mentre Le scrivo, mi è appena arrivata notificata nella posta elettronica, una mail inviatami da un utente di Facebook con il quale ieri sera ho avuto un’accesa discussione sull’aborto terapeutico. Lui ne è fortemente contrario, ed ecco perché; ho fatto per Lei il copia e incolla:
Ti racconto la mia esperienza: to my daughter who is now twelve years were diagnosed with various malformations for which he was recommended to my wife the choice of 'abortion (I was told that would not survive childbirth). Together we decided not to. The course was difficult and will remain so: I did not want to deny the right to try to live today is happy and so are me and my wife.
One thing serious in the story of this man, as in that of Cristina, is that doctors rarely explain you well for your patients as does the 194 for abortions after the 90th day, unless they have already decided to terminate their pregnancy. The gentleman in the mail I had to explain I am good, how the law in these cases and why he believed that abortion on a healthy fetus was "therapeutic" to avoid suffering and rightly wondered where they came from the parameters to judge what could be the threshold of suffering from which by law would be considered just to prevent the life of a human being. These parameters belong only to us women, each in relation to their child, their own history. And no one should make decisions in our mouth, then the cross so we are always and only we carry it. Finally
: She lamented the fact that there are more feminists than once. Sure, some will be compared to the 70 dead, someone else will stand aiutando la figlia a crescere i nipotini visto che dallo Stato aiuti per crescere i figli manco a parlarne, ma per il resto le femministe ci sono ancora e pure più toste di quelle di prima; chi manca all’appello sono prima di tutto una sinistra forte e soprattutto convinta di ciò che è, di quel che fa e perché lo fa, e poi, nella fattispecie della 194 a mancare sono i medici che ne hanno capito davvero lo spirito, il senso, per chi è stata creata e perché, e fra questi ginecologi che mancano all’appello metto anche Lei.
Ah dimenticavo, dal momento che nonostante l’ottimo lavoro svolto da 25 anni nel centro delle ivg, Lei non ha ancora capito cos’è l’aborto volontario, allora glielo I'll explain: it is violence, not just the product of conception, but first of all about the woman who undergoes it always, even when they did nothing to prevent it. For a woman victim of any violence is always offering psychological help, because for a woman who aborts is not this expected? Because she keeps thinking that if I wanted to be, would otherwise have been cast, would be careful, or simply would have been his mother. You doctors keep in mind only to preserve the physical life of women and the psychological? Not worth the same?
0 comments:
Post a Comment