I am surprised that nobody as yet has commented on the possible non treatment of babies of under 24 weeks gestation.
Personally I would oppose any blanket ban on treatment at a definitive age.
However I do feel that sometimes the medical team in conjunction with the parents do have to make the very difficult decision in the interests of the baby.
Whay are others' views please?
I'd rather not think about it unless I have to. It's one of those topics you hope you never have to make decision about. It should be based on recommendations of the consultant though, and not have a definite 'cut off'. All babies grow differently. You can't apply a general rule to all cases.
i had a baby at 23 weeks and 5 days, the midwife refused to help him and he died after an hour, i also have a little boy who was born at 26 weeks, he is now 6 and has cerebral palsy but is loved immensley, babies should be judged by the way they are at birth, if my 1st little boy was given that chance rather than automatically deemed 'unviable' he may be here now
I agree with 0Bonio, i remember I breathed a little easier once my pregnancy progressed beyond 26 weeks. So sorry to read about the loss of your baby at 23 weeks Boobesque, I cant begin to imagine what that must be like for you.