Because of course having a disabled kyd is a good idea...

I was enraged to see this on the front page of one of the local papers today. The moo has had a child die, and is now begging for monetary contributions to have her sterilisation reversed so she can have another defective loaf who will have a few years of miserable painful life with a serious illness.

It really annoys me that when I ask for sterilisation, this is the kind of thing that is thrown back in my face.

So am i reading this right? she was 40 when she had the limited life child, spent 10 years paying for it, now likely is 50, wants a reverse and thinks she actually stands a chance to conceive a healthy replacement? for starters i smell a mateyer moo.

Quote
mooo
"I think he would have liked a brother or sister to be honest, but having another child would not have been fair on them or him because he needed constant care at the time."

A bit friggen late to give him the sibling he always wanted, he cant experience it once he's already dead :headbrick

Quote
moo
"If I had been given all the facts at the time, I would never have gone through with it."

Trust a moo not to read into a major life decision.

I know its always great to hear that a moo got sterilized and wont be making anymore loaves, but i do wish doctors would either time it better, or have them give the moo all the facts and info in a recorded room under the moos consent, so that when they change their minds, the doctors have some grounds to say the moo agreed 100% and can pay it herself.

I believe she is 40 now, but still getting on a bit for creating loaves that don't have defects. I imagine a kid with muscular dystrophy and downs is going to have such a great quality of life, isn't it?

What additional facts did she need to know that a tubal ligation is a permanent measure and if a woman is not sure she is done breeding she needs to chose another means of birth control?

Now that the disabled sprog is out of the way and doesn't need constant care, they can have the other one they always wanted? The chances are very high that the next one would also be disabled and have a short life, so I believe she was right in making the decision to be sterilized after her son was diagnosed as disabled. At least she done that right.

Now I'd say if she wants it reversed she should have to pay for it. The NHS has more important things to spend their money on than some poor moo who lost her 'baby' and wants another. Now if she does have another one and it's disabled than they shouldn't get any help with equipment etc from the NHS it should all be on the parents seeing as they knew the risk going into it.