Quote:
Originally Posted by Chesby05
I did not dispute that a child born at 23 weeks gestation would be that SIZE, I just said it was a clever photo - designed to manipulate people. Your baby, born at 21 weeks and after two weeks of medical intervention, including drugs to help him breathe and survive, still was attached to tubes, incubators and under very intensive medical care at two weeks of age - it's NOT the equivalent to 23 weeks' gestation because he was already born and being assisted to survive, as are all babies born so prematurely. Their development is significantly advanced by medical intervention, and you cannot say that a child born at 23 weeks' gestation is going to look like the one in that picture.
|
Have I seen children that were in the NICU, at that age that were able to be off everything? Most definitely. There were several kids in the NICU that were not on anything but antiBs that were near that age.
Also, do not for one split second think that their development is advanced. My son is almost two years old now, he just started walking a few months ago, he is not even eating baby food yet, and will barely eat biterbiskets (and when he does bite them, he will only take small portions at a time), and is only saying two words. His adjusted age is 15 months. A normal 15 month old should be far more advanced.
Medical care with that early a birth does not advance development, it only supplements the conditions in the womb. The only drugs the kid was on were antibiotics (for pneumonia, and the infestation of bacteria he was forced into isolation for) and pain killers because simply moving in a non fluid filled medium caused him pain.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chesby05
That photo makes it look like a perfect little baby pops out with no intervention needed, and one that would survive easily on its own without any help and would do just fine. Which is rubbish, as you know, from your own experience.
|
And if I only fell on my experience with my boy, then I would say you are correct. But fortunately for me. I actually looked around the NICU to see what was going on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chesby05
It's a misleading photo, it's propaganda, and people shouldn't be sucked in by it. Babies don't even open their eyes in utero until the 26th week - but they will if they are born too early. There is a lot that is different if a baby is that premature.
|
Depends on how early the kid was born. And you are totally wrong on how early they open their eyes in utero. Please read up on some biology. With the new 3d imagery they can see eyes opening as early as 20 weeks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chesby05
If that photo were realistic, all children would be born at 23 weeks gestation because all they would need to do is grow. This is not the case.
|
Now if that picture is real, (and it could be) it does not say that all children born at that age would be like that. From my small experience with them, it tells me that they can be that way, I say that because I have seen kids at that age like that.
But regardless, even if they can not survive without care, they can still survive.
Say I am blown the hell up in Iraq, and I am on a bunch of machines, are you going to pull the plug if the doctor tells you that I have a good solid chance at living a decent life? No you are not.
Now keeping in mind that premies are the exception not the rule, are you going to take that chance away from any kid?