What the hell, surrogacy already exists. Next this psycho woman will be justifying rifling through coma patients' pockets for keys as "full-vehicular donation" because she doesn't like paying for rentals.
Also she should be careful what she wishes on brain dead women, if she's saying stuff like "there's no medical reason not to" she's halfway there herself. The author presumably didn't find a paper explicitly comparing rates of complication and miscarriage, for the same reason there are no papers weighing the risks of normal pregnancy Vs pregnancy locked in a cage with bears, it's very rare and the qualitative answer should be self evident.
As someone else has already said it extremely expensive to keep someone alive and healthy after brain-death, and "healthy" is a relative term there.They're extremely prone to infection and a slew of other issues and more often than not are on a cocktail of drugs to combat those, not ideal in pregnancy. Not to mention the weird developmental problems that will arise out of being essentially stationary for the whole 9 months. The patient can be moved around in specific ways to help prevent sores forming, not so much for the fetus. For any medical professional with half a functioning brain it should be presumed that a brain-dead pregnancy is at a much higher risk of developmental defects and miscarriage until proven otherwise by data, not the other way around.
Hell, turning brain-dead patients into perpetual Mad Max style bloodbags would be marginally more ethical, because at least it might actually work and would potentially solve a life-threatening problem.
What the hell, surrogacy already exists. Next this psycho woman will be justifying rifling through coma patients' pockets for keys as "full-vehicular donation" because she doesn't like paying for rentals.
Also she should be careful what she wishes on brain dead women, if she's saying stuff like "there's no medical reason not to" she's halfway there herself. The author presumably didn't find a paper explicitly comparing rates of complication and miscarriage, for the same reason there are no papers weighing the risks of normal pregnancy Vs pregnancy locked in a cage with bears, it's very rare and the qualitative answer should be self evident.
As someone else has already said it extremely expensive to keep someone alive and healthy after brain-death, and "healthy" is a relative term there.They're extremely prone to infection and a slew of other issues and more often than not are on a cocktail of drugs to combat those, not ideal in pregnancy. Not to mention the weird developmental problems that will arise out of being essentially stationary for the whole 9 months. The patient can be moved around in specific ways to help prevent sores forming, not so much for the fetus. For any medical professional with half a functioning brain it should be presumed that a brain-dead pregnancy is at a much higher risk of developmental defects and miscarriage until proven otherwise by data, not the other way around.
Hell, turning brain-dead patients into perpetual Mad Max style bloodbags would be marginally more ethical, because at least it might actually work and would potentially solve a life-threatening problem.
You can get a surrogate, but not if you talk like this.