So, where are those pictures that are supposed to make me cry? I couldn't find them.

rebelyell2006: So, where are those pictures that are supposed to make me cry? I couldn't find them.

No, they were supposed to let you know you're room needs dusting.

/www.dumpthememe.com

So by not telling the kid that there is little to no chance of recovery they plan to accomplish exactly what?

I mean it sucks that one has to learn about their fate at such a young age but there's no need to be delusional about it.

If anyone needs me, I'll be hugging my four-year-old.

/got a kleenex?

Babbies don't retain memories that early, so congratz on nothing.

I have yet to cry from any of those stories.

///Clearly heartless over here

I_Am_Weasel: The family have not told Katy that the condition is terminal.

"Mom, can I read that story about us they printed in the paper?"

/For the love of God, do something Tom!

I was gonna make a horrible joke but I shall refrain

LegacyDL: So by not telling the kid that there is little to no chance of recovery they plan to accomplish exactly what?

I mean it sucks that one has to learn about their fate at such a young age but there's no need to be delusional about it.

2/10

1. That seems like a really irresponsible decision to make just for the sake of some sentimentality.

2. I guess it was only 3 weeks early, so no real harm done.

natmar_76: Babbies don't retain memories that early, so congratz on nothing.

She didn't do it for the baby. She did it for her dying daughter and for herself.

And I didn't get huggy/kissee from my daughter this morning in the rush to get her to kindergarten. Now I am going to be grumpy all day....

/and the baby will grow up to see these pictures

natmar_76


Babbies don't retain memories that early, so congratz on nothing.


illiterate and a jerk.....two for one. Congratulations!

Shouldn't the parents be concentrating on the dying kid instead of setting up a kodak moment with the baby?

Honest Bender: 1. That seems like a really irresponsible decision to make just for the sake of some sentimentality.

2. I guess it was only 3 weeks early, so no real harm done.

I was thinking the same thing. Induction is always an added risk though, even with only a few weeks to go as it increases the chance of need a C-Section though I suppose that is more dangerous for the mother than the baby.

Certainly a better reason for induction than your OB having to go away on vacation.

Ahh, shiat. She's got the same thing that killed my little brother - tumor on the brain stem. They tried everything to get rid of it but the last option was surgery, and the odds weren't good enough. They might remove all the tumor, but they also might damage his brain stem and kill him anyway. Eventually, we just brought him home so we could enjoy the rest of our time with him. He had about the same time between diagnosis and death as this girl, too - about 9 months, I think. He was diagnosed at 2, died at 3.

mcnguyen: Shouldn't the parents be concentrating on the dying kid instead of setting up a kodak moment with the baby?

pretty sure they were by allowing her the happy moment of meeting her baby sister. You're just looking for attention though, aren't you? You're welcome.

Stories like this not only break my heart but make me so paranoid about my little one. I have no idea what I would do if this was happening to my child.

That poor family. :(. I can't imagine losing my little girl.

/would do Craig.

Matthew Keene: [static.quickmeme.com image 1x1]



2nd try

mcnguyen: Shouldn't the parents be concentrating on the dying kid instead of setting up a kodak moment with the baby?

Like, sitting at her bedside and concentrating really hard? Focusing really, really hard and making grunting noises because they are concentrating so hard? RRRRrrrrrrr, we are concentrating really hard on you honey, are you cured yet? No, okay, now let's concentrate even harder. We aren't going to do anything else, except concentrate on you because that is all we should be focusing on.

Yes, sitting by her bedside and bringing in people she knows and loves, not running away and bringing some random baby back.

Subby has a cleaning lady? F@#kin 1 percenter.

karnal: illiterate and a jerk.....two for one. Congratulations!

You sound upset. Maybe you should go lick a puppy.

Child protective services to remove the babby from the parents custody in 3...2...

Ho hum, boring, too many humans on the planet anyway and certainly too many nervous nellies and cry babies.
End product of human reproduction grosses me out.

Slaxl: Wow, organise the comments by worst rated. I was thinking "isn't it dangerous to induce early labour?" I can't be arsed reading the article but I'm guessing it was only done because it was safe to do so in whatever way it works and the family wouldn't risk one life to make another slightly better. But if this was the daily mail that comment would get me -2000.

You do know that most labors are induced these days? Docs can't be bothered with delivering a baby at 2am or on Saturday, so they induce at 8am. Mommies don't want their coochie stretched of torn, so they opt for a C-section. Risks be damned.

Bladel: Sad story....but did Dad dye his hair green for a Jets game? Or trick of the light?

If your kid was sick, you'd be a little blue as well.

JackieRabbit: Mommies don't want their coochie stretched of torn, so they opt for a C-section.

My wife had two c-sections.

/living the dream

nice, she got to meet the replacement child before she sets off for the clouds

The dying child will hold a special place in all of the other childrens memory. The baby will at least have some pictures of them with the 10 year old. It won't be the same as the others who have 'real' memories and mementos. I am sure the 10 year old was excited about the new baby (and if it was medically ok for mom and the baby) there should be no problem for her to have some joy near the end of her life.

Our first son passed away at birth. Two years later (minus 1 day) our next son was born. He is now 13. We have two more after that and all ask about their older brother. The oldest though has told us that he wished he had had a chance to meet him and see what having an older brother is like. he hasn't said that in a few years but, I think that is because he realizes that being the oldest is more fun. I mean he gets to boss the other ones around when we aren't looking.

Crewmannumber6: Subby has a cleaning lady? F@#kin 1 percenter.

What, only 1%ers can be married?

Honest Bender: 1. That seems like a really irresponsible decision to make just for the sake of some sentimentality.

2. I guess it was only 3 weeks early, so no real harm done.

The thing is, those last 3 weeks are generally when the lungs finish cooking (if I remember what I read from What To Expect Blah Blah. While it may not be hugely dangerous (?), it's still not something I think I would have done, especially since they have another child. If it was just the one kid, then yes, I'd consider it. But... Eh. This story just makes me uncomfortable.

JackieRabbit: Slaxl: Wow, organise the comments by worst rated. I was thinking "isn't it dangerous to induce early labour?" I can't be arsed reading the article but I'm guessing it was only done because it was safe to do so in whatever way it works and the family wouldn't risk one life to make another slightly better. But if this was the daily mail that comment would get me -2000.

You do know that most labors are induced these days? Docs can't be bothered with delivering a baby at 2am or on Saturday, so they induce at 8am. Mommies don't want their coochie stretched of torn, so they opt for a C-section. Risks be damned.

Haha. No. Only about 20% of labors are induced. Oh, and doctors are fighting back against the scheduled c-section trend (unless it's medically necessary). No doctor in my entire health network would induce early or allow a woman to schedule the birth for her convenience.

Oh, and yes, some women don't want their vajayjay stretched, but some (like me) also don't want their entire abdomen opened like a zip-up hoodie while they're awake and aware of what is happening.

posthocergoetc: Oh, and yes, some women don't want their vajayjay stretched, but some (like me) also don't want their entire abdomen opened like a zip-up hoodie while they're awake and aware of what is happening.

I don't think I care either way whether or not I get unzippered if it's necessary, but since I had the option, I definitely preferred to use my parts as they were more or less intended.

But you'd better believe I had drugs.

Poor family. Poor kid, she sounds like a sweetie... they figured out something was wrong because she wasn't smiling, as in she always was smiling otherwise. Glad she got to meet her newest sister.



And semantically -- based on the headline, I had thought that a grown woman was meeting her OWN 10-year-old sister (who was dying), and was heavily pregnant so was induced so that she would be able to travel. Turns out the inducement was so that the baby got to meet the baby's dying sister. Got it.

Man, I didn't even know Katie Holmes was sick.

Elroyone: Man, I didn't even know Katie Holmes was sick.

Yeah I was surprised no one had mentioned that little fact until know.

//seriously, Katie Holmes?

posthocergoetc: JackieRabbit: Slaxl: Wow, organise the comments by worst rated. I was thinking "isn't it dangerous to induce early labour?" I can't be arsed reading the article but I'm guessing it was only done because it was safe to do so in whatever way it works and the family wouldn't risk one life to make another slightly better. But if this was the daily mail that comment would get me -2000.

You do know that most labors are induced these days? Docs can't be bothered with delivering a baby at 2am or on Saturday, so they induce at 8am. Mommies don't want their coochie stretched of torn, so they opt for a C-section. Risks be damned.

Haha. No. Only about 20% of labors are induced. Oh, and doctors are fighting back against the scheduled c-section trend (unless it's medically necessary). No doctor in my entire health network would induce early or allow a woman to schedule the birth for her convenience.

Oh, and yes, some women don't want their vajayjay stretched, but some (like me) also don't want their entire abdomen opened like a zip-up hoodie while they're awake and aware of what is happening.

I don't know where you got your 20% number. But I know 20 women who have had babies in the last three years. Only four were not induced. It's becoming a very common practice.

There's just something cruel and unusual about that.

You cannot "meet" a newborn, you can only "see" a newborn.

Wow...the amount of hatred and vitriol towards the mother in this article has been... breathtaking... even by Fark standards. Let's see...you try having a child who's dying while being pregnant and see how agonizing that is. There are, agreeably, many crappy and selfish reasons to induce early or have a C-section, but having your dying child meet their new sibling, not to mention making sure that you are there for said dying child, is not one of them.

Jezubs...I started crying just reading the tag line. I am not clicking that article...
Thanks subby.
//

You don't buy a puppy until the old, sick dog dies.

"Look honey, meet your replacement. Isn't she a sweetie?"

"Oh, I'm still doing fine and making a fortune. Thnx4asking!"