Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6872|The Land of Scott Walker
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17237979/

MIAMI - A premature baby who doctors said spent less time in the womb than any other surviving infant will remain in a hospital a few extra days as a precaution, officials said Tuesday.  Amillia Sonja Taylor, born Oct. 24 after just under 22 weeks in the womb, had been expected to be sent home Tuesday.  Barbara Moore, spokeswoman for Baptist Children’s Hospital, said she did not have details on why doctors changed their minds about releasing the infant.

Doctors say Amillia is the first baby known to have survived after a gestation of less than 23 weeks. She was just 9½ inches long and weighed less than 10 ounces when she was delivered by Caesarean section. Full-term births come after 37 to 40 weeks.  A database run by the University of Iowa’s Department of Pediatrics lists seven babies born at 23 weeks between 1994 and 2003.  Amillia, the first child for Eddie and Sonja Taylor of Homestead, now weighs 4½ pounds and is between 25 and 26 inches long.  "We weren't too optimistic," Dr. William Smalling said about Amillia Sonja Taylor, seen here in October. "But she proved us all wrong."

She has suffered respiratory and digestive problems, as well as a mild brain hemorrhage, but doctors believe the health concerns will not have major long-term effects.  “We can deal with lungs and things like that but, of course, the brain is the most important,” Dr. Paul Fassbach said Monday. “Her prognosis is excellent." 
Amillia was conceived in vitro and has been in an incubator since birth. She will continue to receive a small amount of supplemental oxygen even after she goes home.  “We weren’t too optimistic,” Dr. William Smalling said. “But she proved us all wrong.”

“She’s going to be in a normal crib, she’s going to have normal feedings, she’s taking all her feedings from a bottle,” Smalling said.
----------------------------
My son was born early at 33.5 weeks and he's now advanced in his development for his age.  Talking at a 2nd grade level at age 3 1/2.   Great to see this little one is doing so well.
Mason4Assassin444
retired
+552|7089|USA
Wow. Miracle baby.
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6872|The Land of Scott Walker
Yep, we humans are amazingly resilient.
Vilham
Say wat!?
+580|7193|UK
If it doesnt grow up with multiple disorders or problems i will be truly amazed.
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6872|The Land of Scott Walker
She was early, not disabled . . .
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6717|Éire
Just watching it on the news at the minute. Her parents are ironically quite large.
Ender2309
has joined the GOP
+470|6997|USA
stingray early=disabled (usually) concerning births, excluding just being a few weeks early 

i was under the impression that most people knew this....
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6872|The Land of Scott Walker
No, the baby has no defects, she was just born very early.  That does not automatically equal any disability.  My son was also a preemie and is perfectly normal.

Edit:
Anyone else here the parent of a child born early?

Last edited by Stingray24 (2007-02-20 17:17:59)

Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6832|North Carolina
I'm assuming this is a subtle parallel to the abortion issue.

I'll put it this way: I'd be all for banning abortion if an appropriate social system was set up to account for all the unwanted kids out there.  Our current system wouldn't be able to handle the repercussions of an abortion ban though....
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6988

Stingray24 wrote:

No, the baby has no defects, she was just born very early.
Not automatically, but due to the baby no longer being connected to the........tube...........thing......often.


For some reason I keep thinking oesaphagus, but that's not it....................this is embarrassing.
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6872|The Land of Scott Walker
Umbilical cord?  You'll remember it once you have kids.
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6872|The Land of Scott Walker

Turquoise wrote:

I'm assuming this is a subtle parallel to the abortion issue.

I'll put it this way: I'd be all for banning abortion if an appropriate social system was set up to account for all the unwanted kids out there.  Our current system wouldn't be able to handle the repercussions of an abortion ban though....
You're right.  Our landfills would overflow with condoms and empty birth control packs.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6832|North Carolina

Stingray24 wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

I'm assuming this is a subtle parallel to the abortion issue.

I'll put it this way: I'd be all for banning abortion if an appropriate social system was set up to account for all the unwanted kids out there.  Our current system wouldn't be able to handle the repercussions of an abortion ban though....
You're right.  Our landfills would overflow with condoms and empty birth control packs.
Or our orphanages would fill with unwanted children and women would go back to the coathanger method.

Stingray, you know I respect your intentions, but you're not being realistic here.
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6872|The Land of Scott Walker
I was trying to be funny, guess it didn't work.  I know it's not realistic to expect people to be responsible with their sex.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6832|North Carolina

Stingray24 wrote:

I was trying to be funny, guess it didn't work.  I know it's not realistic to expect people to be responsible with their sex.
Sorry man, tone is hard to imply in netspeech.  I thought you were being sarcastic rather than funny.

But seriously, wouldn't you agree that most births are unplanned?
|CoR| Majik_Kracker
Anti-Tank Aficionado
+10|7126|Arizona, USA

Turquoise wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

I'm assuming this is a subtle parallel to the abortion issue.

I'll put it this way: I'd be all for banning abortion if an appropriate social system was set up to account for all the unwanted kids out there.  Our current system wouldn't be able to handle the repercussions of an abortion ban though....
You're right.  Our landfills would overflow with condoms and empty birth control packs.
Or our orphanages would fill with unwanted children and women would go back to the coathanger method.

Stingray, you know I respect your intentions, but you're not being realistic here.
Turquoise would you want to be that unborn child that gets aborted so that the people already living would have less problems on their hands?

It's better to have life with problems than no life at all.

[EDIT] stupid verbs of being!

Last edited by |CoR| Majik_Kracker (2007-02-20 20:46:07)

Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6832|North Carolina

|CoR| Majik_Kracker wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:


You're right.  Our landfills would overflow with condoms and empty birth control packs.
Or our orphanages would fill with unwanted children and women would go back to the coathanger method.

Stingray, you know I respect your intentions, but you're not being realistic here.
Turquoise would you want to that unborn child that gets aborted so that the people already living would have less problems on their hands?

It's better to have life with problems than no life at all.
Perhaps, but "compassionate conservatives" should support more social programs if they care about the fate of the unborn once they exit the womb.
DesertFox-
The very model of a modern major general
+796|7111|United States of America

|CoR| Majik_Kracker wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:


You're right.  Our landfills would overflow with condoms and empty birth control packs.
Or our orphanages would fill with unwanted children and women would go back to the coathanger method.

Stingray, you know I respect your intentions, but you're not being realistic here.
Turquoise would you want to that unborn child that gets aborted so that the people already living would have less problems on their hands?

It's better to have life with problems than no life at all.
It takes some doing to have a baby. Avoid [insert humorous sex euphemism here] and there would be no added problem to those already living.
|CoR| Majik_Kracker
Anti-Tank Aficionado
+10|7126|Arizona, USA

Turquoise wrote:

Perhaps, but "compassionate conservatives" should support more social programs if they care about the fate of the unborn once they exit the womb.
I agree entirely, it's not enough to have a bunch of "saved" children without homes. It would work much better if the mothers would keep the child, but those days are coming to a dramatic end.
|CoR| Majik_Kracker
Anti-Tank Aficionado
+10|7126|Arizona, USA

DesertFox423 wrote:

|CoR| Majik_Kracker wrote:

Turquoise wrote:


Or our orphanages would fill with unwanted children and women would go back to the coathanger method.

Stingray, you know I respect your intentions, but you're not being realistic here.
Turquoise would you want to that unborn child that gets aborted so that the people already living would have less problems on their hands?

It's better to have life with problems than no life at all.
It takes some doing to have a baby. Avoid [insert humorous sex euphemism here] and there would be no added problem to those already living.
lol are you suggesting everybody just stop having sex?
That would work about as well as me trying to build a time machine.
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6988

Stingray24 wrote:

Umbilical cord?  You'll remember it once you have kids.
Bah!  That's clearly a term used by the right wing conspiracy, thusly explaining my inability to use it!

I feel so stupid...................
deeznutz1245
Connecticut: our chimps are stealin yo' faces.
+483|6919|Connecticut
Bush's fault.
Malloy must go
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6872|The Land of Scott Walker

|CoR| Majik_Kracker wrote:

lol are you suggesting everybody just stop having sex?
That would work about as well as me trying to build a time machine.
No, it's as simply as using a condom.  Yes, they do fail sometimes, but in combination with the woman on birth control, the odds are pretty slim for pregnancy.  Some people won't take those simple steps and then don't want to deal with the natural biological results of their actions.

Turquoise wrote:

Sorry man, tone is hard to imply in netspeech.  I thought you were being sarcastic rather than funny.  But seriously, wouldn't you agree that most births are unplanned?
No worries, man.  I was being rather sarcastic. 

Most births unplanned? I can only speak for myself and the couples I know.  For my wife and I, we planned ours.  By "planned" I mean we chose not to actively prevent - she wasn't on birth control and I wasn't using protection.  We took a "if it happens, we'll be happy, until then . . . weeeee" kind of attitude.   Now we are using both birth control methods because we cannot afford another child right now.  The other couples we are good friends with do the same.  If people don't want kids, they should be smart and proactively prevent it.

Last edited by Stingray24 (2007-02-21 08:08:30)

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard