Posted on 03/18/2011 1:14:05 PM PDT by wagglebee
The world has taken notice of a 14-month old baby from Canada whose family has been fighting the medical establishment since October to help their child breathe. Moe and Sana Maraachli were refused a tracheotomy for their son because the apparently fatal neurological disease that the child has renders further intervention “futile.”
Working with many others, we at Priests for Life arranged to have the baby transferred to Cardinal Glennon Children’s Medical Center in St Louis, and I went on the medical jet to pick up the baby and his father on Sunday night March 13. Now, the child has another chance at getting better care, and the family another chance at maximizing the time they can spend with their child.
A lot of media has accompanied the event. One reporter who was not too interested in covering the story asked, “Who the hell is Baby Joseph and why should I care?”
The short answer is, Baby Joseph is all of us.
After all, the problem underlying this case is not simply one particular hospital or the Canadian medical system. The problem is a philosophy of life that says that how valuable you are depends on how well you function. The problem is a philosophy of medicine that says that if someone is going to die anyway, there’s no benefit in prolonging life. The problem is a philosophy of suffering that says we can actually determine what somebody else’s level of happiness is, and measure their misery, and that if they don’t have the good sense to eliminate it, we can step in and do so against their wishes.
If we don’t think that we and our loved ones will be affected by this philosophy when it comes to our own medical challenges and decisions, we should think again. It’s happening every day, often with subtle or not so subtle pressure from medical professionals, who, instead of rendering medical judgments, render value judgments. Doctors are not supposed to judge for us the “meaning” or “value” of extending the life of a loved one, or our own life. Rather, they are supposed to judge for us whether a particular treatment or intervention will have certain effects on a loved one or on us. They need to leave it to us, in consultation with our family and clergy, to determine what meaning or value we find in the situation.
This is what the parents of Baby Joseph, together with Priests for Life and many others, are trying to say. Baby Joseph’s parents, who want to care for him no matter how long or short his life may be, were told that this life wasn’t worth extending. It’s time to draw a line in the sand and tell the medical profession that this is not their role. “Life not worth living” belongs to a philosophy that led to one of the world’s greatest holocausts, which ended with the declaration “Never Again.”
Our efforts on behalf of Baby Joseph can actually be summarized by those two words.
LifeNews.com Note: Father Frank Pavone is the national director of Priests for Life.
Too bad you commented on this one...but, hey, that's your right. In the sense that we're all human beings, Father Pavone is correct in saying "Baby Joseph is all of us."Unless we want to hand over to doctors and the government the right to decide when and how we die, we simply have to express our outrage when they attempt it.
>>If you are not interested, can you not keep that information to yourself?<<
I did until I saw that headline. I wanted to say I agree with it. I do not believe in walking past a thousand suffering people to help another suffering person simply because he is the one getting all the press. This is political.
Yes, but why this one baby specifically. Are there no needy people in your own town?
>>Father Pavone is correct in saying “Baby Joseph is all of us.”Unless we want to hand over to doctors and the government the right to decide when and how we die, we simply have to express our outrage when they attempt it.<<
And right there you nailed it. This is a political issue. It is not about Joseph. It is about the state.
“Yes, it is the Christian worldview vs. Darwin/Postmodern view.”
Think again. We’ve got a supposed conservative Christian here saying he could give a damn.
I am an agnostic and I can assure you, I care alot.
This religious judmentalism is sickening.
Even the parents realize that the baby isn't going to live. It's a cruel misrepresentation being made here.
The real point is that the parents should have the say, not the hospital. They have the right to take their child home to die, whether or not the hospital thinks it's too cruel to possibly inflict an infection or pneumonia on him (or his body, since his mind is already gone). Once we let other make decisions on our own lives, we have opened the door to tyranny.
We know there are people like you in our midst. Too bad you had to crawl out from under your rock and make yourself known.
>>wrote:
We know there are people like you in our midst. Too bad you had to crawl out from under your rock and make yourself known.<<
I suppose the irony of that post is lost on you. ;)
Let me add another facet to this: I have not had television since 1997. I am not exposed to MSM hype. I get ALL of my news from the internet. I pull what actually matters to me and my family, and is within my realm of control. I will not step over a thousand suffering people to help one that has achieved notoriety. However, as I DO educate myself about this story (starting with reading the article before I responded to some of those who responded to me here) I realize this has everyone in a tizzy because of the political ramifications as opposed to this single person. And what is happening is what one would expect to happen under the health care system which supplies services to this child’s family.
The system is responding the way I would expect it to, which is why I am so against it. That said, I’ve been going more and more Galt every week for the last three years. And Galt didn’t fight the system. He couldn’t. Rather, he stepped out, allowed evil to reach it’s full fruition, and then stepped back in when it imploded.
My plans are not nearly as grandiose, but along the same lines.
To use Father Pavone's own words, "The short answer is, Baby Joseph is all of us."
If you look at the whole context of the verse I cited, from about Matthew 25:35-45, the mere awareness of another's suffering makes the action incumbent. Granted, we can't donate money, time or expertise to every worthy cause, nor can we personally bring succor to every suffering person (although it's my personal suspicion that most of us can do more than we do). We can however, pray, and spread awareness so that perhaps another person with the money, time or expertise a situation requires is inspired to give of themselves. IMHO, that's the Christian thing to do.
>>We know there are people like you in our midst. Too bad you had to crawl out from under your rock and make yourself known.<<
By the way, I get this response a lot from women when dealing with child and animal issues. I expect it. I like to say that whenever I want to get in touch with my feminine side, I reach for my wife. I have a very male attitude. I am not a “sensitive 90’s guy” with wildly misplaced compassion.
One cannot make difficult decisions when you are muddled in emotion.
Of course, it is about BOTH. It has to be, once the state is in the picture. The parents were found to be in contempt of court for not "consenting" to have the respirator removed. Hello? The parents were not allowed to pay for the tracheotomy themselves to bypass the "state's" declaration of only palliative care, as IT deemed apprpriate. Hello? The hospital refused to release the medical records, even at the PARENTS" request. Hello? And on and on. Who is playing God here? It's "political" only because one has to fight fire with ... FIRE. Hello?
>>Granted, we can’t donate money, time or expertise to every worthy cause, nor can we personally bring succor to every suffering person (although it’s my personal suspicion that most of us can do more than we do). We can however, pray, and spread awareness so that perhaps another person with the money, time or expertise a situation requires is inspired to give of themselves. IMHO, that’s the Christian thing to do.<<
With that I heartily agree. What you are basically telling me is that we all choose our avenue of giving and prayer and I basically should “feel” conviction that I am judging the avenue others took.
And I think you are correct.
I apologize to the rest of you on this thread for belittling your sincere efforts to help in this situation in whatever way you are. I sincerely mean that.
Nope. I'm not telling you anything apart from the fact that Christ told us, "...whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me."
If you wish to turn your back on Him, and say that His suffering doesn't matter to you, feel free to do so.
First they came for baby Joseph...
Why not pretend you are Galt and go away NOW.
I would much rather have agnostics than atheists in control of government. Usually agnostics base their reason on Natural Law which design presupposes a supreme being. They do not deny the possibility of God which means they will not usually adopt the atheist viewpoint of man.....that they are just animals so the end justifies the means.
The end justifies the means can never be a Christian viewpoint. People who call for the end of Baby Joseph Maraachli are people with this moral relativist viewpoint. There is no objective truth. They cannot truly be Christian if they believe in moral relativism.
>>If you wish to turn your back on Him, and say that His suffering doesn’t matter to you, feel free to do so.<<
There is a disconnect here.
>>First they came for baby Joseph...<<
Yes, that is the political aspect I was talking about.
>>Why not pretend you are Galt and go away NOW.<<
I will not judge you for the attitude for you only know what I have posted here. That is not enough for any person to really have much of a clue about who I am. I do know this: Those that know me in real life would be perplexed by that statement being aimed at me. ;)
>>Nope. I’m not telling you anything apart from the fact that Christ told us, “...whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.”<<
Actually, what you were telling me in the thread to which I was responding was this, and I quote:
“Granted, we can’t donate money, time or expertise to every worthy cause, nor can we personally bring succor to every suffering person (although it’s my personal suspicion that most of us can do more than we do). We can however, pray, and spread awareness so that perhaps another person with the money, time or expertise a situation requires is inspired to give of themselves. IMHO, that’s the Christian thing to do.”
I feel as if you are trying to trap me in a form of “Is it true you’ve stopped beating your wife?” The “either/or” perspective does not apply here.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.