Nobody is claiming that some parents don’t want it. But sticking your head in the sand doesn’t change the insidiousness of this.

Exploiting grief for an anti-choice agenda.

Yes. I am right there with you in Michigan. I have been through this loss and I see this legislation for exactly what it is. Exploiting grief for an anti-choice agenda. Grotesque.

Absolutely. Centuries have gone by with no need for this and suddenly our benevolent state apparatus decides to become “compassionate”? Please.

I had a late 2nd trimester miscarriage that was devastating. Yes, we already had a name for our daughter. However, I don’t trust this move at all. official documents are always there for an official PURPOSE. A birth certificate establishes an identity for the individual to conduct legal business in the future. A death…

I have been through three miscarriages. Two in the second trimester and one in the first. Two before I had my son and one after. I know I can’t speak for every woman who has been through this, because it is a different experience for each of us for a wide variety of reasons, but from my standpoint...this is theater.…

I live in Florida. I’ve also had a miscarriage. I know exactly what this is - I see you and yours, Rick Scott.

It’s not compassion. It’s an attempt to define when conciousnes begins. Once that’s settled it all down hill fast from there.

I think I prefer fake models anyway

“I’ve lost a lot of that myself as well. We’ve had a lot of paparazzi involved in my family life,” she said. “I had my privacy taken away after I took someone else’s. I know the difference between right and wrong and I chose wrong,” she said.

In a new interview with Good Morning America, Mathers admits that the experience taught her a lot about privacy,

“Mathers said she meant to send the photo to a friend and had no intentions of “breaking the law” by posting it publicly.”

TwitterAudit Says 67 Million of Katy Perry’s Followers Are Fake

Because you don’t own your children. You can’t just do what you want with them if it isn’t in their best interests.

In the US we call death panels “Insurance companies” and we make damn sure they’re insanely well paid to fuck people over.

Your kids are not your property, you can’t just do whatever you like with them. The hospital and the courts have a moral, ethical and legal duty to look out for the best interests of the patient (this child in this case). If that means preventing the parents from removing the child from hospital, then that is what…

But it’s not what you want, it’s what’s best for the kid. Prolonging a child’s suffering because you can’t let go is never right

The courts have shown enormous empathy for the parents - the entire process has been intentionally incredibly gentle to them, given they’re already going through hell. This case has been covered for a long, long time in the UK: this article is a... slightly slanted view of events. You can read the chain of rulings -…

Well, that’s the real issue here. Of course our desires as parents would be to try everything, but *our* emotional wants and needs shouldn’t be the priority in a decision like this. If we were the one in the hospital bed, many of us would prefer to just go with dignity instead of prolonging it all with experimental…

Pictured: a man who has definitely paid for some abortions over the years.