Aborted Babies incinerated to heat Hospital!!
- Thread starter koolpc
- Start date
This
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 12,488
- Location
- Bath
Hippocratic oath?
And article.
All written to get a response, rather than what's actually happening. Of course they are burnt as medical waste.
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Jun 2012
- Posts
- 2,817
- Location
- UK
why would you waste the heat, like yes it is touching that it is from bodies being burnt, but you might aswell use that heat for something useful i.e heating a pool or in the case of that article a hospital
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 1,195
The issue isn't so much that they are incinerated, but human tissue (which a foetus is) must be handled separately to clinical waste.
The first error is treating them as clinical waste, the second is not giving the parents a choice (burial/cremation/incineration are the options I think). Both errors are against the rules.
The first error is treating them as clinical waste, the second is not giving the parents a choice (burial/cremation/incineration are the options I think). Both errors are against the rules.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 22,512
- Location
- ST4
It's medical waste, what should they do with it other than incinerate it? They're actually quite strict on waste too, a mate of mine has a foot amputated and wanted to keep the offending bodypart afterwards. They wouldn't let him.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 32,909
- Location
- Rutland
Possible solution to fossil fuels running out?
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2004
- Posts
- 25,821
- Location
- Glasgow
Because the OP's opinion will already be biased due to the fact they don't agree with it.
The thread may be slanted in a direction other than it would be if you'd started the thread due to differing opinions on abortion but I think Lysander is right and it can't really be derailed by the person making the opening post.
Could you elaborate? I suppose it may depend on the version but I didn't think the Hippocratic Oath had anything to say on this matter.
I think there's an error made in not telling the parents but provided if there was informed consent then I wouldn't have any particular problem with it.
When babies are aborted, they are sucked out via a tube, so there isn't anything but gunk left over.
If they are longer into their pregnancy and have a miss carriage and deliver a still baby, then I can understand why people might object to this and not having them buried.
If they are longer into their pregnancy and have a miss carriage and deliver a still baby, then I can understand why people might object to this and not having them buried.
This is a really deep subject. Too deep for GD i think as there are probably people here who went through something like this. Its still wrong though both the abortion and burning them for heat. If you do not want the baby give it up for adoption or something.
Not so. Grundon is a company which specialises in this stuff. You always see their massive vans at the back of hospitals [if you have access]. I used to work in Hammersmith Hospital and they were there every day.
http://www.grundon.com/how/clinicalWaste.htm
Ok, some agree with abortion. That is their prerogative. Whatever one thinks on that, one should not just throw the remains into an incinerator without a lot of thought etc. The headline is alarming. Clinical waste to me is not the incinerating of what is the start of human life! Some dignity should be shown at the very least. A little life destroyed and then tossed without any care into a mix of other hospital byproducts etc. Disgusting!