Anencephalic Newborns are kept alive while their Organs are Harvested (pizzagate)

submitted ago by NOMOCHOMO

After being discussed for 30+ years, the international medical community has repeatedly allowed babies to be born and kept alive so their organs can be harvested. Now, parents are even encouraged to carry their children to term so they can be harvested.

(1988) Should Anencephalic Infants Be Used as Organ Donors?

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/82/2/257

"The frontiers of organ transplantation and its scientific and ethical-legal aspects have advanced to the arena of pediatrics. The technical advances bring with them the problem of organ procurement, with estimates that the discrepancy between supply and demand for pediatric organs will be even more pronounced than in adults. In partial response to this anticipated shortage, it has been proposed that newborns with anencephaly be used as organ donors."

Each year, approximately 1,800 babies are born in the United States with anencephaly.4 Available data suggest that 25% to 45% are live born and at least 95% die within the first week.5 Apart from their fatal neurologic malformation, their organs are presumed suitable for transplantation.4 Moreover, prenatal α-fetoprotein and ultrasonographic screening can identify almost all anencephalics with a high level of certainty.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2722973/

Anencephaly is a central nervous system abnormality that is characterized by congenital absence of the forebrain, skull and scalp. Some rudimentary forebrain tissue may exist and a functioning brainstem is usually present. Most anencephalic infants die within days or weeks without life-supporting interventions (2,7). One infant, ‘Baby K’, lived for 2.5 years as a result of aggressive life support.

Use of anencephalic infant organs for transplantation gained widespread publicity in the late 1980s after the Loma Linda Medical Centre reported a successful newborn heart transplant using a Canadian anencephalic infant, ‘Baby Gabriel’, as the organ donor.

In 1989, Loma Linda reported a study (6) of 12 anencephalic infants who were supported with intensive care measures for one week to facilitate declaration of brain death. Successful organ donation did not occur from any of the infants. The study authors concluded that anencephalic infants could not be used as organ donors without legal and medical changes to regulate brain death and organ donation.

https://www.nytimes.com/1995/05/24/us/donating-organs-of-anencephalic-babies-is-backed.html

American Medical Association states [in 1995] it should be permissible to take organs from anencephalic babies while they are alive...[because] after death, the organs have deteriorated and cannot be used.

http://everydaybioethics.org/resource/anencephalic-babies-are-now-“wanted”—-their-organs

In early March [2016], at the annual meeting of the British Transplantation Society, some National Health Service (NHS) transplant surgeons suggested a plan to alleviate the shortage: harvest organs from newborns who have no prospect of survival.[3] One group in particular drew their interest: children with anencephaly, a disorder that can be identified at about the twelfth week of pregnancy. Anencephalic children are missing a major part of their brain and skull, and are said to have “no chance of survival,” although such babies have been reported to live as long as one,[4] two, or even three years.[5] The surgeons further reasoned that since these babies could never experience consciousness, they would not suffer.

The proposal draws an ethical line by stating that, at least initially, no woman carrying an anencephalic baby would be approached until she had made a decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy. If she continued, she would be “supported” in unspecified ways for the full nine months. At birth, the baby’s body would be supported by a ventilator—contrary to current NHS protocols, which prohibit life-sustaining technology for anencephalic newborns. The baby’s organs would be harvested once he was declared dead, but while his heartbeat and breathing were being maintained artificially, and before he met the legal and medical criteria.

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-32425666

A newborn baby, who lived for less than two hours, became Britain's youngest-ever organ donor last year. Doctors at the University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, carried out the pioneering surgery three minutes after Teddy Houlston died on April 22. His kidneys were then used to save an adult's life in Leeds.

https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/life/inspirational-stories/a41870/annie-ahern-anencephaly-infant-loss/

(2015 the same thing was done in Oklahom)

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna51436

(2012 in ohio)

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/mother-uncovers-lasting-impact-of-sons-organ-donation/

(2016 in washington)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

Vindicator ago

@Nomochomo, this is missing a couple of key pieces of information. First, where is the source that supports this statement?

Now, parents are even encouraged to carry their children to term so they can be harvested.

Second, you say this is related to PG because "the biomedical industry is legally abusing and harvesting the organs of living children" yet the supporting link you provide for the AMA statement on this is decades old and also refutes the claim, stating:

Courts have said that anencephalic babies fall under the purview of the Americans With Disabilities Act, deserving all the medical care that society can provide.

You're missing any information at all about the current position of the AMA or what the current legal situation is, and your three last links of actual tissue donations all emphasize how difficult and rare it was for parents to attempt to donate their children's organs.

Pizzagate as defined for this sub is an organized attempt by a corrupt group of wealthy, globalist powermongers who use the abuse of kids to keep their chokehold on power. You've demonstrated no connection between that and parents who want their terminally ill kids' lives to help other terminally ill kids. It's certainly likely that biomed profiteers would try to take advantage of such parents, but that is speculative. This thread needs to be posted in v/pizzagatewhatever.

However, I'll give this the 24 Hour Grace flair in case you have more evidence that actually establishes a connection to PG.

NOMOCHOMO ago

  1. Where is the source that supports this statement: "Now, parents are even encouraged to carry their children to term so they can be harvested."

"http://everydaybioethics.org/resource/anencephalic-babies-are-now-“wanted”—-their-organs"

Fetal Harvest: Anencephalic Babies Are Now “Wanted”—For Their Organs

For although about 4,000 babies with anencephaly are born in the US each year,[9] in the UK, only about a dozen are born every year. The rest—at least 230 annually—are aborted. Yet British transplant surgeons anticipate that, under their proposal, at least 100 anencephalic babies annually will become organ donors. This means that all ten or twelve women who will carry their babies to term regardless would need to consent to donation, while another 90 or so women who would otherwise abort must be persuaded to carry their babies to term for transplant purposes.

But how can the latter goal be reached if a woman cannot be approached about donation until after she’s decided against abortion? No need to worry: the surgeons are already discussing whether to amend their proposal to allow them to offer the woman the option of organ donation at the time the diagnosis of anencephaly is made. If this is done, and if it motivates a woman to carry her child to term and give birth, would she be doing so because she loves her child, or only for the sake of some other family’s child? Wouldn’t the latter amount to treating the anencephalic baby merely as a medical resource, an object to serve “the greater good”?

It is no secret that under the current regime in both Britain and America, women who are carrying a child with a disability are often pressured to terminate their pregnancy. I have been told about more than one pregnant woman being taken aside and quizzed by the nurse, “Is your husband forcing you to continue this pregnancy?” Frequently, the only option she is offered is abortion. It is ironic, to say the least, that these brave women’s refusals to abort are now being lauded rather than scorned—but only because the utilitarian goal posts have shifted toward “using” their babies’ organs

The term "proposal" is a weasel word, as it is an active policy being implemented.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nhs-plan-harvest-organs-babies-7503903

"A committee has been set up by NHS Blood and Transplant, tasked with boosting organ donation from newborns and very young babies. A lead nurse has also been appointed to co-ordinate efforts to educate NHS staff about talking to parents about such a sensitive issue. Under the proposals, midwives and other NHS workers are to be educated about the possibility of using babies’ organs in transplants."