douggie, that same website says "Continuation of this program beyond that period (2010) is dependent on the availability of funds."
...wait, so, they're saying NYS has the funds NOW?????
and here I thought we were in debt
It's possible the couple didn't reduce due to moral reasons. But I don't know their story.
FTR, our doctor wanted to take the baby that was the smallest in size (the one we ended up losing). So I imagine they'd go by size or heart rate to selectively reduce.
1 Corinthians 13:1 "If I speak in the languages of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal."
My friend was pregnant with 3 ... they wanted to "selectively harvest" one of them. They told her they would take Baby A because it was the easiest one to get to. She kept all 3 they were delivered at 28 weeks. She had 2 girls and a boy, one of the girls died at 2 weeks. The other 2 are now healthy and in middle school. And Baby A ..... is my son's best friend.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)