Friday, March 25, 2011

Baby Joseph: Guidance Misguided?

The debate over Baby Joseph Maraachli continues as motives on all sides come into question in various media reports.

Here’s a sample:

Attempted rescue of Baby Joseph Maraachli, pro-life poster child, is deeply misguided
Peter Singer
New York Post
March 18, 2011

If Priests for Life were really serious about saving lives, instead of "rescuing" Joseph so he can live another few months lying in bed, unable to experience the normal joys of childhood, let alone become an adult, they could have used the money they have raised to save 150 lives - most of them children who would have gone on to live healthy, happy lives for 50 years or more.

Hospital stands firm on baby Joseph case, The Windsor Star, March 24, 2011

Baby Joseph becomes U.S. political issue, Toronto Sun, March 22, 2011


Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Canadian doctors wanted dignity for the child and chose quality of life over quantity. They were supported by their peers. They did no harm.

An American "faith-based" hospital chose a tracheotomy and long-term ventilation, despite the "grim" prognosis. Oh, and the American hospital was paid to do so by a radical 3rd party, the pro-life Christian group Priests for life. Possible conflict of interest?

Who would you want to treat your child...?

Monday, March 28, 2011  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home