19.10.08 - Gerhard Lichtenauer -

[D-1] Case Of Damage Child?

TV recommendation: “Kreuz & Quer” (Repeat from 17.6.2008)
Documentation: Case Of Damage, A Child? followed by discussion: Prenatal Diagnosis

Comment see below.

Cross & Cross: Case Of Damage, A Child? – Mon 20.10.2008 22:25-23:00 (3sat)
Documentation of Brigitte Wojta
Can a disabled child to a “case of damage”? It is a fact that The Supreme court in Austria has awarded the parents of a disabled child whose entire livelihood – retroactively since birth, because the body screening of the embryo, signs of a disability to be overlooked were. The parents argued that they would have aborted the pregnancy had they been informed in time that the child would be disabled. The judgment has caused a great excitement. Although the adequate monitoring and promotion of a severely disabled child is time-consuming and expensive. But now that the parents not only get the cost replaced, but the overall cost of living has critics on the Plan called. You see, with this decision the existence of the disabled people questioned. “The event of damage, kid?” from the series “the cross & the Cross” deals with the often difficult decision of parents to integrate a disabled child and on the other hand, people who voluntarily disabled children as foster children in your family. © ORF

Cross & Cross: Prenatal Diagnosis – Mon 20.10.2008 23:00-23:55 (3sat)
Discussion: Legal, social, and ethical aspects
With Erwin Bernat (Professor of medical law, Graz), Barbara Maier (Ob / GYN, Salzburg), Gerhard Luf (legal philosopher) and Albert Brandstätter (live in Austria) discussion leader: Günter Kaindl, storfer
On the opportunities and problems of prenatal diagnosis Kaindl dorfer experts and stakeholders to discuss, under the direction of Günter on legal, social and ethical aspects of the topic. To Barbara Maier, gynecologist, Gerhard Luf, philosopher of law, Erwin Bernat, a Professor of civil law, as well as Albert Brandstätter of the “Lebenshilfe Austria”. © ORF

Comment:

-> The Movie: “The Event Of Damage, Kid?”

It was, unfortunately, used several times the term “water head”, which has a negative connotation. This Symptom should be better by the (equally important) the medical term “Hydrocephalus” is replaced. By early operative treatment of this disorder of CSF circulation from the ventricles (via the derivation of the cerebrospinal fluid) is produced from this cause is not a disability.

The report on the 32-year-old Dietmar (this Symptom) had to grow up in a foster family integrated – I found a pity that he has a normal job, but in the special world of a disabled persons ' workshop works.

Dr. Karl Philipp, chief Executive of the Department of gynecology at the SMZ Ost, voice, in connection with the killing of disabled children (Anm.: Until the birth), of “children who do not have a life worth living in front of you, ...”. How can and he is allowed to say such a thing?

DKKS Andrea S. from the disabled device “Sweden pen” brought good and right to expression, that the decision of parents whether or not they want to provide for your child or the child in an institution, care, be respected in any case.

But it is to be noted also: Concerned parents need a better freedom of choice for such decisions. Unfortunately, the disability-related burdens borne in the case of family care, only a very small part of solidarity, the lion's share “shall pay“ the Concerned with the of life“”.

-> To The Discussion: “Prenatal Diagnosis”

It was unwise, that no persons Concerned were charged. Also, for example, foster parents of disabled people from the film would have been predestined to represent an opinion that has not lost itself in the jurisprudence, but with the life is written.

So it was in the discussion, without reference to life, and without reference to the supporting film, the talk of relativism in the value of Life and the randomness of the right to Life, the word.

Mr Albert Brandstätter of the of life help has beaten wacker, when he called for a solidarity-based solution, in my opinion, the only reasonable and acceptable way out of the legal and ethical Dilemma.

Similar to in the movie by the Supreme court, the Vice-President of the Dr. Ronald Rohrer noted, came out also in the discussion, it is clear that the Central Problem is not the Supreme court judgement in itself (unfortunately, it is only logical), but the legally untenable and intolerable “legality” of the Eugen is the indication and is up to the legislature to clean up this blatant violation of the Constitution, finally!

Gerhard Lichtenauer, Austrian citizens ' initiative “the Home home” [URL removed, note.] and Katja's Blog (www.katja.at)