The Children of Burden

She was only 26 years old, but life was already starting to press in on the New Brunswick woman: She had three children to support, her husband was seriously ill, his business was failing and the couple had lost their house and car. The last thing the young mother needed was another mouth to feed. To prevent any costly additions to the family, she had a tubal ligation, a permanent sterilization procedure thousands of Canadian women undergo every year.

Much was her shock, then, when, barely a year later, she became pregnant. She eventually gave birth to a healthy baby girl. But just over a month ago, a judge ruled in favour of the lawsuit she had filed over the sterilization blunder, awarding the mother $80,000 in damages.

“Sometimes the birth of a child is not a blessing. It is often a burden,” Madam Justice Paulette Garnett of the New Brunswick Court of Queen’s Bench wrote in her judgment.

Yet Margaret Somerville, a prominent medical ethicist based at Mc-Gill University, said decisions like the one in the New Brunswick case show a “pro-choice” approach, which she called a “huge scene of confrontation” these days.

Merely calculating the impact of a child in purely financial terms could be problematic, suggests Duncan Embury, a Toronto malpractice lawyer.

“If the cost of raising a child constitutes damages, what if the child then goes on to become a professional athlete? … A child can be an economic advantage as well as disadvantage.”

In fact, as courts continue to grapple with wrongful pregnancy cases, deciding whether children ultimately put their parents in the black or in the red may be the thorniest issue.

“How do you weigh the pros and cons of a child?” asks Mr. Daley, lawyer in the failed-abortion case.

“If you’re a parent, you know that children can be trying at times, but they can help out their parents in old age, help around the house and some are just a joy to be around. So it’s a very difficult issue.” (Source)

This is so typical of the culture of death. I can’t imagine how this woman explains to her child that she went to court seeking damages because her child was born.  Don’t know about you, but I’d have a pretty big chip on my shoulder if I was her kid. 

“My mom says she loves me but she got $80K because her sterilization of my existence didn’t work. She sued because I cost her too much.  Guess she won’t have too many complaints when I opt to euthanize her when she becomes too much of a financial and emotional drag on my good times.”

My eldest daughter sometimes asks me if, with the four girls I have, I would have preferred a son. I keep telling her that I am very blessed indeed that I had four daughters and I hope that God blesses me with many more of them.  I’m on a roll with girls and their tempraments. Having a boy would screw up my routine, royally!  (But I’d be happy with that too.)  Oh yes, and I would welcome them WHETHER THEY WERE HEALTHY OR NOT. I throw that in their for the eugenic morons who always say, “it doesn’t matter what you get as long as it’s healthy.”

Anyhow, if I have to ensure my daughter understands her worth as a young lady and that she is not valued any less for being one, can you imagine the children out there whose parents told them they were a “mistake”.  And what is even worse is that they’re going to court to make it official!   What a perverse society we live in.

6 thoughts on “The Children of Burden

  1. We live in a Politically Correct, Morally Relativistic Darwinian Humanist Canada. Values have been inverted here. Politically Correct Moral Relativism is considered an absolute value and absolute values are considered relative. The liberal-minded media only show us their own perspective or point of view. They seem to be on the side of death to keep ABORTION LEGALIZED and impose on the baby the values of death in the form of a knife, a vacuum and scalding chemicals. When thousands of people marched for life in cities across Canada our popular liberal-minded media was silent!

    What is the difference between a relativist and a person who admits she has no morality at all? There seems to be none.

    HOW does a relativist make a moral decision? He decides for himself whatever he thinks is best. How does someone with no morality know how to act? She decides for herself whatever she thinks is best.

    Even those people with no scruples whatsoever can be said to have their own morality. This illustrates the problem with Canada precisely.

    How can we make sense of an alleged morality that functions the same as not having any morality at all ? IF a thing can’t be distinguihed from its opposite, then the distinction between the two is meaningless.

    The morality of relativism is no different than having no morality at all.

    The people of Canada have been taken in by liberal-minded Politically Correct Darwinian Humanist Moral Relativists for too long.

    Darwin summed up his view of ethics and morality in his Autobiogrphy, stating that one who does not believe in God or an afterlife,” can have for his rule of life, as far as I can see, only to follow those impulses and instincts which are the strongest or which seem to him the best one.”

    Canada has for some time now also has this view institutionalized in it’s education establishments and Law Courts and through them all of society.
    True Christians are now forced to compartmentalize their worldview or they are persecuted. Most comply and are thus integrated into the Politically Correct Relativist Darwinian Humanist “NEW” Western Civilization. The Christian Worldview is replaced with Charles Darwin’s worldview in Western Culture. That is why our freedoms are diminishing. The greedy powerful survive and he victims suffer.

  2. Former abortionist Dr. Bernard Nathanson says that real-time Ultrasound, which gives a moving picture of the child in the womb; Electronic Heart Monitoring, which detects fetal heartbeats, Brainwave Monitors, which measure brain activity, Fetoscopy, which allows a physician to actually eyeball the baby, simply astounded him. Such techniques as Cordocentesis even allow medical diagnosis, treatment and surgery in utero.” I finally came to the conviction that this was my patient. This was a person ! This was a change of mind as a result of Fantastic Technology.”

    Dr. Nathanson fastened an Ultrasound Machine to a woman undergoing an abortion, and produced ” SILENT SCREAM”, the film horrified the nation. It showed the fetus trying desperately to move away from the vacuum, and then its body parts were successively sucked off. The film produced a massive campaign of defamation agaist Dr. Bernard Nathanson from the liberal-minded.

    This only made him more determined, so he decided to show an abortion from inside the womb. He attached a camera to a Fetoscope and inserted it during a D&E abortion. The resulting film was “ECLIPSE OF REASON”. Abortion is the murder of babies ! When will this Holocaust end in Canada ?

  3. “I throw that in their for the eugenic morons who always say, “it doesn’t matter what you get as long as it’s healthy.””

    So are you saying that you don’t care if it is healthy or not?

    I think when people say it doesn’t matter what you get as long as its healthy they are expressing the fact that if they had a choice to select health OR sex they would opt for a healthy baby over being able to select its gender.

    Horny Toad

  4. No, for the more crass among this constituency, it is because they want to suggest that if it is “disabled”, the child will be aborted. We know, of course, of the epidemic on that score in western culture.

    Secondly, for the more clueless of this constituency, they say it because they don’t want the burden of a disabled child and implicitly, even if they don’t intend it, put a lesser value on disabled children.

    Would you say such a thing to the face of a mother of a Down Syndrome child?

    Shame the devil and tell the truth.

  5. With three boys we would love to have a little girl…or not. We’ll love whomever comes along.

    (But the four year old hit me with the full on hose today. I love him even more despite wanting to…)

  6. Not sure, if you’ve noticed this Jay, but in my circle of friends, I notice that families are having predominantly mostly boy or mostly girls. I have no idea why this is happening. However, my wife (who holds an BSc. and MSc.) says that that depends on the male.

    She also tells me that it depends on the time of the month when conception happens — another wonderful trait of natural family planning: you get to find out all these neat nooks and cranies that you would otherwise not know.

    🙂

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Solve : *
15 × 4 =