4 ms·
No, it sounds like you picked out a quote to make an edgy comment as you left out the very next sentence. >Of course, it wasn’t that anyone wanted these babies
by sillyquiet 6y ago
No, it sounds like you picked out a quote to make an edgy comment as you left out the very next sentence.
>Of course, it wasn’t that anyone wanted these babies to die, but doctors simply believed that they were too sick to survive.
i.e., they didn't want to prolong suffering.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- tboyd47 6y agoI consider the idea of doctors deciding who lives and who dies to be applied eugenics. "First, do no harm." Maybe that's not how the situation really looked on the ground, but that's what the author of the piece presents to us, and it wouldn't be strange for that time, either.
- sillyquiet 6y agoThat is a really dumb statement. Did I miss where the article said they were making this decision based on the genetics of the baby?
- tboyd47 6y agoThis is not me trying to be edgy or snippy. During an era when eugenics was the predominant belief of the professional class in America, when they openly promoted "mercy killings" of certain classes of people, withheld treatment of deadly diseases from citizens on the basis of race, and sterilized thousands without their consent, and with all of this being so well-documented, no, I don't need the author to spell out the word "eugenics" for me to see it when it's written all over their actions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States
- sillyquiet 6y agoLeaving aside the dubious assertions there, you are inferring that all these doctors would prolong life saving measures for preferred classes while leaving non-preferred classes of people to die. Completely from inference. With no evidence. Nonsense.