Brain-dead pregnant woman 'can die' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-30599063

TLDR Braindead pregnant lady, 18 weeks in. Families wishes are to turn off the life support, while lawyers for the unborn child (debate about "when is a life a life" aside) argue it should be kept on if there's a chance the foetus will survive the term, then she should be kept alive.

So, what would you argue for?

Personally, I'd side with keeping her alive until the child is born, unless it's impossible  for that to happen (Even a 1% chance is worth it). But I'm happy to hear if someone can back up the alternative.

Allow both to die.
The child will suffer greatly without a mother.

Ideally, the family should want the baby to live, however, they (as those who hold power of attorney) have the ultimate decision on when to pull the plug if the mother is brain dead, regardless of the baby's status.

18 weeks sounds like she intended to keep it. The family should probably adhere to her wishes.

Quote from: Meta Cognition on December 27, 2014, 06:21:24 AM

Quote from: Nuka on December 27, 2014, 05:57:18 AM

It's cruel to keep the mother's body alive just so it can pop a baby out.
No, it's just fucked up.

Fucking disrespectful.

It can't possibly be cruel if she's braindead.

It's disrespectful. That's literally using her body as an object.
She should be allowed to rest in peace rather than have her living corpse be used as a baby oven.

All of the underlined bits are incredibly misleading uses of emotive language.

At 18 weeks, it's fairly clear she wanted to keep the baby. It was her desire to bring a new life into the world, and that should be respected, don't you think? If losing all cognitive functions makes her an object, then so be it, because we still know what her intentions were prior to this situation. Ending the foetus's life without reason, and against the now braindead mother's wishes, is surely more disrespectful.

In saying that, if the family isn't willing to look after it - or if they can't find somebody willing to do so - then it'd probably be best to kill them both, instead of cycling another baby through the foster care system.

Quote from: Meta Cognition on December 27, 2014, 06:50:21 AM

Quote from: Nuka on December 27, 2014, 06:46:57 AM

Plus you can't possibly know what her wishes were just from the fact that she was pregnant for 18 weeks.

I'm not claiming to know, I'm claiming it's safe to assume that four months of development is a decent sign she probably wanted to keep it.

I'd still say pull the plug unless the family REALLY wants it.

I can get down with that.

I respect the family's wishes. However, if the lawyer wants to pay all the bills and take care of that child, be my guest I say. Wealthy/Rich people don't get it.. Most people can't afford to keep someone alive on life support that long and also take care of a newborn right after.

Quote from: Nuka on December 27, 2014, 06:46:57 AM

Plus you can't possibly know what her wishes were just from the fact that she was pregnant for 18 weeks.

I'm not claiming to know, I'm claiming it's safe to assume that four months of development is a decent sign she probably wanted to keep it.

I should probably add she already has 2 other children, so this kinda sides with her wanting children.

Also, the family will probably have to take care of these other children regardless (no mention of the father in the article, a bit odd)