home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Path: sparky!uunet!wupost!csus.edu!netcom.com!ray
- From: ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer)
- Subject: Re: FOCA: And I quote.....
- Message-ID: <l0vnmvd.ray@netcom.com>
- Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 02:17:16 GMT
- Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services
- References: <nyikos.716067595@milo.math.scarolina.edu> <k6tn!_p.ray@netcom.com> <1992Sep11.144108.10600@menudo.uh.edu>
- Lines: 27
-
- HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.) writes ...
- >In <k6tn!_p.ray@netcom.com> ray@netcom.com writes:
- >[very premature baby survives and goes home after long time in hospital]
- >
- >> And at $300/day for 4 months, it probably cost at least $40,000 (and note
- >> that I'm using _extremely_ conservative cost estimates). How many lives
- >> were lost to save this one person? How do you justify spending this kind
- >> of money on a regular basis to "save lives" when it means trading one
- >> life for hundreds?
- >
- > Ray, are you in favor then of triage for all? "It'll cost too much to save
- >this guy. Ditch him." This can happen when there are too many casualties to
- >treat (say after a battle, or a major urban disaster). Then the deciding factor
- >is usually time and medical resources. Time spent on saving 1 person could
- >cost several others their lives.
-
- So then, you have no qualms about letting a thousand die to save one infant?
-
- While I agree that this is a simplistic approach to the issue, it does
- rather discount the common assertion that the pro-life crew are trying
- to save lives, doesn't it? Perhaps it _is_ a matter of being anti-abortion?
-
- Perhaps preventing abortions _won't_ save lives.
-
- --
- Ray Fischer
- ray@netcom.com
-