Your moral compass says? fetus cremation = heat at NHS?

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**KingCracker**

I just heard/read about this and feel a bit...... unsure of how exactly I feel. On one hand, I'm thinking, just because it was aborted doesn't make it right to just incinerate a baby along side trash, nor use it in a process for heat, that just seems wrong. Yet at the same time, it is medical waste. What would be the best course of action to take?

Article
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/britains-nhs-hospitals-incinerated-aborted-fetuses-with-trash-report-says/

British health officials are responding to a news program's report that accuses some hospitals of incinerating aborted and miscarried fetuses, in some cases as part of a system for heating the facilities.

The TV news program Dispatches on Channel 4 in the U.K. reports that 10 National Health Service (NHS) hospital trusts have admitted burning the remains as "clinical waste" alongside trash, while two other facilities disposed of the remains in incinerators that generate power for heating, multiple British news organizations including the BBC and the Telegraph reported.

Reports said that in the past two years alone, at least 15,500 fetal remains were incinerated by 27 NHS trusts. In some cases, mothers were told that the remains were cremated.

Trusts provide health care services to patients and are part of Britain's government-operated health care system.

About one in five pregnancies ends in miscarriage, according to the NHS. In addition, 2011 government statistics show 189,931 abortions were carried out in England and Wales.

One hospital cited in the report, Ipswich Hospital in Suffolk, was said to have incinerated more than 1,100 fetal remains between 2011 and 2013 in a "waste to energy" plant operated by a private contractor. The remains were reportedly transferred there from another hospital.

Ipswich Hospital Trust denied its involvement, and told the Telegraph it was concerned to discover that fetal remains from another hospital had been incinerated on its site.

"The Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust does not incinerate fetal remains," said a spokesperson.

Addenbrooke Hospital in Cambridge was also cited for incinerating 797 fetuses at its "waste to energy" plant.

Health minister Dr. Dan Poulter told the BBC the practice was "totally unacceptable."

"That is why I have asked Professor Sir Bruce Keogh, NHS medical director, to write to all NHS hospital trusts, to make it clear that it must stop now," he said.

The Human Tissue Authority, which regulates the removal, storage and use of human tissues in the U.K., also responded to the Channel 4 report.

"We will act on this immediately. We already advise hospitals that incineration may not be appropriate for fetal remains, and will now go further in light of the information we have been given, and make our standards for hospitals clearer," Dr. Alan Clamp, Chief Executive of the Human Tissue Authority, said in a statement.

He said he expects hospitals to have a clear and sensitive disposal policy which considers the needs of parents.

Dame Sally Davies, chief medical officer of the NHS sent the Human Tissue Authority a letter drawing attention to the concerns, which authority chair Baroness Diana Warwick responded to and posted online. "We encourage anyone who is worried about the inappropriate handling of remains to contact us, the Care Quality Commission, or Department of Health," she said.

**hotsauceman1**

For Heat, Hell No. but for trash, Im not sure, is it incinerated with other things like placenta and the dead patient the intern killed?

Also, 1 in five? Wow, im kina surprised by that

**Sasori**

It's just medical waste, regardless of the fact that it's an aborted fetus, it is medical waste at the end of the day.

I see no issue with this. Just like I see no issue with disposing of other medical waste.

This just feels like a sensationalist news story, over nothing to me.

**Dark Apostle 666**

Hm, seems dodgy, doesn't it?
I'm pro-abortion, but something about that doesn't seem quite right.
I would say it should be the parent's decision whether they allow that to happen or not - if they don't want to, I don't know, bury it or have it "properly" cremated, but if they're ok with it, then I guess it's ok.

**Co'tor Shas**

Seems logic to me. It's a cheaper form of cremation. I don't see anything wrong with it.

Now for the moral knee-jerk reaction *sigh*

**whembly**

I...

Um...

I have no words...

This has to be a hoax...

**Co'tor Shas**

Why?

**whembly**

Co'tor Shas wrote:
Why?

Talking to me?

**mega_bassist**

Unless the parents are requesting the cremated remains, I don't see an issue.

**feeder**

I have no problem with this. Waste is waste. WHat would you like done with your amputated foot? Stuffed and mounted? (actually that might be pretty cool)

**whembly**

mega_bassist wrote:
Unless the parents are requesting the cremated remains, I don't see an issue.

via Telegraph's article:

The parents of those lost or aborted children were not consulted about what was going to happen to those remains. In at least one hospital, mothers of 797 babies lost before 13 weeks of gestation were told the remains had been “cremated.”

**mega_bassist**

whembly wrote:
mega_bassist wrote:
Unless the parents are requesting the cremated remains, I don't see an issue.

via Telegraph's article:

The parents of those lost or aborted children were not consulted about what was going to happen to those remains. In at least one hospital, mothers of 797 babies lost before 13 weeks of gestation were told the remains had been “cremated.”

Ah, I missed that bit. Well, that's a bit of an issue.

**Sasori**

whembly wrote:
mega_bassist wrote:
Unless the parents are requesting the cremated remains, I don't see an issue.

via Telegraph's article:

The parents of those lost or aborted children were not consulted about what was going to happen to those remains. In at least one hospital, mothers of 797 babies lost before 13 weeks of gestation were told the remains had been “cremated.”

I would think it would be the Parents responsibility to take any action on what to do with the remains. It's not the hospitals job to inform them.

And in a sense, they were cremated...

**Frazzled**

There's a joke here about wasting perfectly good other other white meat.

Thats so icky gross its not funny.

**Orlanth**

If society decides that foetus is not a human being prior to a specific stage of term then it helps to be consistent.

If its Ok to abort to begin with its ok to treat the remains as biological waste.

If its not Ok to do this then it raises question as to whwether the foetus should have been aborted to begin with.

You cant really have it both ways, either it's a womans right or its infanticide, there is no way to be on both sides of the fence. Funerals or formal cremation for aborted foetuses show a very distinct preference for pro-life. just without wanting to confront the pro-choice lobby.

In the UK abortion used to be a grey area, which made a lot of sense, it was semi-legal, legal in certain circumstances but generally available. Then it was regraded as a human rights issue, pro-choice no longer was a grey area, but become the state sanctioned 'correct' opinion. Now the only consistent way to continue is to consider the results of the abortions a waste product, if society doesn't like that then we should go back at least to the way it was in the 90's, a grey area. If you wanted an abortion you got it done, without state interference, but you or the state didn't hammer on about it being a right but a socially acceptable wrong.

**Iron_Captain**

My morale compass says that abortion is wrong, but I have nothing against burning dead organic material. Burning has always been a common way to dispose of the dead.
However, I do think the way the dead are burned is very important. The remains of dead people should be treated with respect, not thrown into some kind of industrial furnace.
So I do think what happens here is wrong. Aborted fetuses should be cremated respectfully, not treated as 'medical waste'.

**Frazzled**

I have nothing against cremation. I have something against burning fetuses and human body parts...for heat. It just scream solylent green, and not in the good way.

**DarkTraveler777**

mega_bassist wrote:
Unless the parents are requesting the cremated remains, I don't see an issue.

My feelings exactly. If the family want to bury the fetus then by all means they should make the request and funeral arrangements and be on their way, but if a patient is having biological material removed at a hospital then incinerating that material is standard operating procedure. These aren't dead children taken from the NICU and thrown in with the cafeteria trash. The fetuses are just like any other tissue sample not claimed by a patient. Biowaste.

*edited out typo

**hotsauceman1**

Frazzled wrote:
I have nothing against cremation. I have something against burning fetuses and human body parts...for heat. It just scream solylent green, and not in the good way.

This Is why I hate hospitals, Where does all this cheap Meat Come From?

**kronk**

Frazzled wrote:
I have nothing against cremation. I have something against burning fetuses and human body parts...for heat. It just scream solylent green, and not in the good way.

Update your movie examples, man.

It's the Matrix.

**whembly**

kronk wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
I have nothing against cremation. I have something against burning fetuses and human body parts...for heat. It just scream solylent green, and not in the good way.

Update your movie examples, man.

It's the Matrix.

Good catch!

I have no issue if the patients/parents agreed to cremation... even if the heat source is tapped.

It's the not communicating part is troubling...

**OrlandotheTechnicoloured**

In theory hospital's should offer a choice of

Incineration (this would not be in with the rest of the medical waste but might involve multiple foetuses from different women and might involve the heat being used for warming the hospital etc)

Cremation (done individually and might involve a ceremony paid for by the parents)

Burial (again done individually and might involve a ceremony paid for by the parents)

this seems perfectly reasonable, unfortunately some hospitals were (apparently) not bothering to ask and just incinerating which is not on (and illegal)

Of course too much reverence for a foetus in terms of disposal at any stage of development could lead to problems for women who spontaneously miscarry while in the bathroom

**filbert**

There are two strands here:

1) Hospitals are required to dispose of medical waste in a timely and sanitary fashion. Most (all?) hospitals have on-site incinerators to do this.

2) Hospitals, like pretty much every other state funded body, are under pressure from the government to cut costs and to explore green alternatives as part of the government's environmental policies. To that end, most (all?) hospitals recycle, invest in solar tech etc etc. Part of that green agenda are initiatives like using the by-product of incinerators (i.e. heat) to heat the hospital, thus saving money and carbon.

Lets be clear here; men in boiler suits aren't heaping babies like coal onto shovels into a furnace - most of the clinical waste arrives in bins and receptacles and are incinerated en masse and anonymously. Aborted foetuses are treated like any other clinical waste - hospitals don't make a distinction and why should they, otherwise you might be upset your amputated arm is being burnt, for example. Obviously, if parents so wish, they can choose to cremate/bury their foetus on their own time rather than leave it to the hospital to deal with. Not sure this is really a story here - it's only the use of emotive language and symbology to somehow convey burning babies fuelling a radiator and generate outrage that way.

**Kain**

A corpse is a corpse, this is simply cremation with less ceremony.

**KingCracker**

I should of made my point more clearly I think. I'm not against cremation at all (that's how I want my remains taken care of) my issue seems to be with the dead fetus just being burned with other trash. I'm not against abortions (unless it's used as birth control, that I have a problem with) but I do personally believe that once a woman can tell medically she's pregnant, then that's a living being inside her. I just have a problem with them being burned...... like trash. Cremate them together then dispose the remains in a more humane fashion.

Make more sense?

**Soladrin**

...So?

I don't see any issue here.

**Frazzled**

KingCracker wrote:
I should of made my point more clearly I think. I'm not against cremation at all (that's how I want my remains taken care of) my issue seems to be with the dead fetus just being burned with other trash. I'm not against abortions (unless it's used as birth control, that I have a problem with) but I do personally believe that once a woman can tell medically she's pregnant, then that's a living being inside her. I just have a problem with them being burned...... like trash. Cremate them together then dispose the remains in a more humane fashion.

Make more sense?

For the record I'm not keen onthe idea of burning people's legs and such to heat the hospital. Again thats just icky on so many levels.
Did no one think about that whole Nazi Aushwitz thing???

**Palindrome**

whembly wrote:
mega_bassist wrote:
Unless the parents are requesting the cremated remains, I don't see an issue.

via Telegraph's article:

The parents of those lost or aborted children were not consulted about what was going to happen to those remains. In at least one hospital, mothers of 797 babies lost before 13 weeks of gestation were told the remains had been “cremated.”

What else did they expect was going to happen to it?

Clinical waste has to be incinerated IIRC as it can be highly infectious and at the end of the day an aborted fetus is clinical waste, just like amputated limbs, debrided wound debris and all the other surgically removed tissue. As it is incinerated anyway it may as well be used to generate heat/energy.

This is a sensationalist non-issue as far as I am concerned.

**Frazzled**

If you don't see a difference I have to ask - are you a replicant?

**whembly**

KingCracker wrote:
I should of made my point more clearly I think. I'm not against cremation at all (that's how I want my remains taken care of) my issue seems to be with the dead fetus just being burned with other trash. I'm not against abortions (unless it's used as birth control, that I have a problem with) but I do personally believe that once a woman can tell medically she's pregnant, then that's a living being inside her. I just have a problem with them being burned...... like trash. Cremate them together then dispose the remains in a more humane fashion.

Make more sense?

Yeah... you're arguing for more dignity. Right?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:

For the record I'm not keen onthe idea of burning people's legs and such to heat the hospital. Again thats just icky on so many levels.
Did no one think about that whole Nazi Aushwitz thing???

Concur.

And... Goodwin'ed.

*stamps Dakka Bingo card*