The other day I had a call from an Indian sounding lady who told me she was calling me on behalf of Tesco’s and Morrison’s supermarkets to tell me I’d won a £60 shopping voucher. Knowing that I had not entered any competition to receive this, my instincts told me this was a scam, and I told the woman so and hung up.
They say you can’t scam an honest person, but if I had been brought up to believe that beneficent corporations would ring me out of the blue to give me money, I might have been fooled. And so it is with organ donation. We have been lied to so completely, so comprehensively, for so long that the public actually believes absolute lies on the subject. Their ignorance is fostered deliberately in order to continue the scam – a criminal act against the people of this country! In fact of course, without our ignorance it could never take place at all.
This lady claims she has been told her baby will die when it is born, and so has decided to carry it to term to “donate its organs”. There is something very wrong with the whole story – I actually suspect it is a false or planted story (I hope so, because otherwise this woman has been deceived into allowing her child to be killed – vivisected – for its organs).
The story begins with an error:
A brave mother who’s unborn child has died in the womb will carry her baby to full term in order to donate their organs to another dying child.
Hayley Martin, 30, from Hull, East Yorkshire found out at her 20-week scan that her child will die during labour or within minutes of birth.
Ummm – which is it? Is it dead, or will it die at birth? Is this just sloppy journalism? I don’t know. Then more strangeness:
While doctors suggested she get a termination to avoid the trauma of birth, she has decided to take the pregnancy to term so their baby daughter’s organs can go to other newborns in desperate need of transplants.
At 20 weeks it would be classed as a late-term abortion and would be “partial birth” – I don’t see how that is less traumatic! (Read: Abortion – the story that brought a class of teens to silence)
The article then says she will be induced “Christmas week” a month early (why on earth would you do that?!)
Then it gets very sad because this woman really does not know the truth about organ donation:
‘I also know there will be babies out there who could have a chance at life with Ava’s healthy organs. Why should two babies die if one can be saved?’
However, the stoic mother-of-three still gets upset when she thinks about losing her tot.
‘I try to be as honest as possible and have a rehearsed speech prepared, but at times I can’t help but to fall apart and cry – especially when strangers congratulate me in the supermarket or at the shops’ she said.
The baby has to weigh a minimum of 5.5lbs to become an organ donor and the couple are still unsure about what their daughter will be able to donate, but think her heart valves, liver cells and pancreas are the likely candidates.
Later in the article they promote the idea of starting a charity in their unborn daughter’s name:
The Martins are also planning on starting a charity project in Ava-Joy’s memory to help other families who decide to carry to term, despite a fatal diagnosis.
They want to raise awareness of fatal fetal conditions, and support families by creating ‘memory packs’ to help them capture every precious moment.
You can read the full story here: Link
Something doesn’t feel right about this article. The images of the sad-faced Mum are there – all too posed and perfect. I cannot imagine any mother wanting to share such a personal and painful decision before the day. It smacks of propaganda for the organ donation drive. I’ve written before about this here: Link
Either this is an absolutely tragic story, made worse by medical deception, or it’s a planted story to test, or garner the level of support there is to bring in a system which expects mothers to consider carrying children to term for their organs. Which, by the way is sick!
I’ll quote from my previous article linked above:
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