posted on May 4, 2001 01:59:24 PM new
A picture began circulating in November. In many people's opinions, it should be proclaimed as "The Picture of the Year," or perhaps, "The Picture of the Decade." It won't be. In fact, unless you obtained a copy
of the paper you probably will never see it.
The picture is that of a 21-week-old unborn baby named Samuel Alexander Armas, who is being operated on by a surgeon named Joseph Bruner. The baby was diagnosed with spina bifida and would not survive if removed from
the mother's womb. Little Samuel's mother, Julie Armas, is an obstetrics nurse in Atlanta. She knew of Dr. Bruner's remarkable surgical procedure.
Practicing at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, he performs these special operations while the baby is still in the womb.
In the procedure, a C-section removes the uterus and the doctor makes a small incision to operate on the baby. During the surgery on little Samuel, the little guy reached his tiny, but fully developed, hand through the
incision and firmly grasped the surgeon's finger. The photograph captures this amazing event with perfect clarity.
The editors titled the picture, "Hand of Hope." The text explaining the picture begins, "The tiny hand of 21-week-old fetus Samuel Alexander Armas emerges from the mother's uterus to grasp the finger of Dr. Joseph Bruner as if thanking the doctor for the gift life...."
You can see the actual picture, and it is awesome...incredible.
posted on May 4, 2001 05:34:56 PM new
It should be noted that the parents were making a last ditch attempt to have a relatively normal child against huge odds. They knew that if anything went wrong the fetus could not be saved so for them it was in effect abort or live normally.
It is an amazing image, probably staged by the surgeon.
"Because it affects the spinal cord, spina bifida can lead to a condition that causes brain damage. Mr and Mrs. Armas were told that if they were to avoid the condition, which was not then present in Samuel, they had to act fast.
``I wasn't concerned about a child who couldn't walk,'' said Julie, ``but I want a child who knows me.''
The theory behind the surgery is that attention to he spine disorder before the baby is born prevents or limits brain damage, and gives a better chance of healing. It does not cure spina bifida, but it is said to provide a strong chance of limiting the damage through early intervention.
The risks, however, are enormous. Controversy surrounds the use of such surgery because it goes against the general medical rule that the risk should not outweigh the benefit.
Mr and Mrs Armas were fully aware that if anything went wrong, no attempt would be made to deliver Samuel by Caesarean section.
Medical science does not yet have the capability to keep a 21-week-old foetus alive outside the womb. The crash-cart was on standby for Julie, not Samuel.
``If he dies, that's horrible for me and for us,'' said Julie before she went into theatre. Wiping tears she added: ``But not for him. The worst thing might be if we don't do this, and this is standard treatment when he's 21, and he says: ``Why didn't you know about that?'' And we say: ``We did, but we didn't do it for you.''
The other major dangers were turning him in the womb to get his back in line with an inch-long cut in the wall, through which Dr Bruner would operate, and that the surgery might involve releasing the fluid around Samuel.
The movement posed the risk of sending Julie into labour contractions, which would have been fatal for Samuel.
posted on May 4, 2001 07:21:42 PM new
Why do I have this deep conviction never knowing the man, that a surgeon who could do this sort of procedure would not find much motivation to seek partial birth abortions for his practice?
posted on May 4, 2001 07:40:12 PM new
That's not the point. The parents knew that the risk was extreme and took the risk so as to either have a more normal child or none at all.
