Multiple births and multiple deaths.

Jun 16, 2007 07:00

Two out of the six Morrison sextuplets have died.

In the case of the Morrison family (the sextuplets born in Minnesota), six eggs were fertilized after using the drug Follistim. (According to the Morrison family website, the doctors said two mature and two immature/nonviable eggs would be released during that particular cycle, but later said that ( Read more... )

multiples

Leave a comment

Comments 201

cumaeansibyl June 16 2007, 12:08:18 UTC
cumaeansibyl June 16 2007, 12:08:39 UTC
kitchenwitch June 16 2007, 12:13:36 UTC
I think that what they chose to name the kids is an entirely different booju post, probably entitled, "Do names like this scar children for life?"

Reply

morpheus0013 June 17 2007, 00:48:16 UTC
Not if they only live a couple days.

Reply


chelleg1977 June 16 2007, 12:23:49 UTC
Considering that medical advice was to selectively kill multiple of their "children", I'm thinking the end result would have been pretty similar.

I do not think that a parent should be charged with a crime for refusing to selectively reduce.

Reply

kitchenwitch June 16 2007, 12:26:52 UTC
The end result wouldn't have been similar, as the remaining children likely would've been cooked longer and had a better chance at surviving and/or having normal lives.

Reply

chelleg1977 June 16 2007, 12:36:17 UTC
similar != same.

Similar in that two (or more) of the children would have died. And we don't know that the others would have stayed in-utero longer as we don't know why they were taken by section at 22 weeks.

Reply

kitchenwitch June 16 2007, 12:42:55 UTC
Would your opinion change if it turned out the only reason they had to be delivered was because there were too many of them?

Reply


hermionesmum June 16 2007, 12:38:28 UTC
No, absolutely not! The idea of anyone being prosecuted for not following medical advice of any sort is absolutely abhorrent to me. It then ceases to be advice and becomes an order capable of robbing people of their self-determination. I'd very likely have made the same choice, that I had to hand events over to God, I trust him far more than any doctor, and I, personally, could never live with having chosen termination ( ... )

Reply

therealocelot June 16 2007, 15:32:04 UTC
I agree with this.

Reply

defaultcrush June 17 2007, 00:36:48 UTC
Agreed. I think it leads to a slippery slope about how much control over I have over my own body.

Reply


jenni_goes_grrr June 16 2007, 12:49:24 UTC
I dont believe parents who are obviously pro life should have to "kill" some of their babies just because they happened to get 6. They did what they felt was right, and they can have the closure of knowing the babies are now with god.

Reply

quietasariot June 16 2007, 14:32:30 UTC
You rule. <3

Reply

redmelde June 16 2007, 15:02:39 UTC
They didn't "just happen" to get six. They used drugs to stimulate ovulation, instead of having no children like God had obviously intended for them.

Reply

kat89 June 16 2007, 18:01:28 UTC
Amen.

Reply


merlyn4401 June 16 2007, 13:06:56 UTC
These questions make me so angry I can hardly see straight.

No, they should not be charged with a crime. How does that work? "We're going to prosecute you because you didn't kill some of your babies when we told you to?" Every parent has the right to decide which path to take in this situation. I'm fairly well sure that they knew they weer possibly risking the lives of some of the babies by trying to carry all of them to term, but they chose to give all of them a chance, rather than "play God" and selectively reduce. I have nothing but respect for them that they chose that route.

As others have pointed out, many other sets of higher order multiples have been born alive, healthy, and with little to no problems. They weighed the odds, and unfortunately, came out on the short end. That's not a crime, by any means. My heart breaks for them that they have lost two of their precious babies.

Reply

aerynmoo June 16 2007, 13:16:39 UTC
I <3 you. And I totally agree.

Reply

kitchenwitch June 16 2007, 13:20:09 UTC
Sorry to make you angry! I was curious about others' opinions, as this question seems to be asked about everything, i.e., "This woman gave her kid Spaghettios and he DIED, should she be held responsible?" :)

rather than "play God" and selectively reduce

Weren't they playing God to begin with?

Reply

merlyn4401 June 16 2007, 13:27:21 UTC
I just really hate the superior, "This isn't what *I* would do, so obviously they are stupid and should be blamed for everything" attitude that shows up about legitimate parenting choices. A kid dies from tainted formula and someone is bound to say the parents are responsible because they should have breastfed. A child dies from a vaccine reaction and someone is going to say the parents deserve it for choosing to vaccinate their children. A child dies from a botched circumcision and the parents are to blame. I've had my fill, I guess.

And no, I don't feel they were playing God. As far as they are concerned, God allowed that many eggs to be fertilized and lives created.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up