This from the Daily Mail (Link), and I quote: [my emphasis added]
“Speaking of obtaining more organs from newborns, transplant surgeon Niaz Ahmad, of St James’s University Hospital in Leeds, said: ‘We are looking at rolling it out as a viable source of organ transplantation nationally.
‘A number of staff in the NHS are not aware that these organs can be used. They need to be aware. These can be transplanted, they work, and they work long-term.’
One specific case medics are considering are babies diagnosed with a brain defect called anencephaly, which can be detected by routine scans as early as 12 weeks and which gives babies no chance of survival.
Under the new proposals, mothers would give birth in the normal way and once doctors had certified the infant dead, its vital organs would be removed. However, donation would not be raised when a woman was still deciding whether or not to have an abortion – and nobody would be compelled to donate their baby’s organs.
In some cases, where donation has been agreed, babies could be certified brain dead but their bodies kept alive by artificial ventilation. Surgeons could then remove organs from these so-called ‘heartbeat babies’ when they are fresh, maximising what can be used and the chance of successful transplant.”
Did you get that? Yes, they’d certify the infant dead, and then it’s ‘vital organs’ would be removed. This is false. The child is either dead, in which case only the kidneys, corneas and heart valves can be taken, or the child is alive, but classed brain-dead, and therefore vital organs – heart, lungs and liver – can be taken as well.
The article goes on to state: [my emphasis added]
“In 2014, Teddy Houlston became what was then Britain’s youngest organ donor after dying just 100 minutes after birth. Teddy’s parents were told their baby would be born with virtually no brain after their 12-week scan, but decided against abortion.
His two kidneys and heart valves helped save an adult’s life.
Doctors have been sounded out about their attitudes to the ‘ethically controversial, yet increasingly practical issue’ of harvesting organs from babies with anencephaly.”
Without anaesthetic. When we don’t know what, if anything, they are aware of.
Of course the public were pretty outraged by this idea, and the comments were full of unsease that this was being put forward. Others pointed out that the story was false, and that the NHS had said this was not anything to do with them.
The fact is the debate has been opened – that is what the article was designed to do – to open the debate and get you thinking that this was a viable option, and to guage the public’s feelings on the issue.
This proposal will move forward unless we say a resounding no again and again. They have begun this with a debate in a national newspaper, next time the debate might be in parliament – will you even pay attention to the news to know about it? Will your MP do what you want, as your representative, if you do?
The public are being softened up for this to become policy at some point – when they’ve suggested it enough times, and you’ve stopped saying no.
Say NO to organ donation.
God Bless you