MLK...40 years on

...April 4
Shot rings out in the Memphis sky
Free at last, they took your life
They could not take your pride

In the name of love
What more in the name of love?
In the name of love!
What more in the name of love?

Pride(In the Name of Love) --U2

Martin Luther King, Jr.
He was a transcendent person to whom none should be compared.
He believed in what was right. He believed in the concepts and ideals upon which this nation was founded. He believed in America. It came through in his words and it came through in his life.



I have a Dream

"I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal."

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a desert state, sweltering with the heat of injustice and oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today."

"When we let freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last! free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"



I See The Promised Land

He was tragically prescient. His "I See The Promised Land" speech was given one week before he was cut down by an assassin's bullet.

"Well, I don't know what will happen now. We've got some difficult days ahead. But it doesn't matter with me now. Because I've been to the mountaintop. And I don't mind. Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God's will. And He's allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over. And I've seen the promised land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people will get to the promised land. And I'm happy, tonight. I'm not worried about anything. I'm not fearing any man. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord."

Parents Sue After Child Inherits Hemophilia

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23416072-24331,00.html

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,340737,00.html


This story is a few days old and it's taken a while for me to react because the emotions keep changing. Disbelief, anger, sorrow. The immediate response was here is another example of the notion so pervasive today that life should be painless and free of sorrow and disappointment and if life is otherwise then it’s someone else’s fault and they should pay.

Life is. It’s up and down, in and out, good, bad, sad, boring, exciting and everything else. It is both joyful and painful. It never goes in a straight line and no matter how well you plan and prepare the unexpected will happen. For good or otherwise. There are no guarantees.

We who have children with bleeding disorders know this all too well. Our dreams, hopes and aspirations for our perfect children were shaken to the core with the diagnosis of hemophilia or von Willebrand’s. For most of us; time, education and the support of others in the bleeding disorders community was all that was needed for those previously crumbled dreams to be rebuilt. Rebuilt and perhaps standing stronger having been tempered by the lesson that fate is fickle and dreams need not be discarded but rather reshaped and refocused.

It’s a lesson that this couple in Australia has obviously not learned or are unwilling to learn. Opting rather to wallow in victimhood and self-pity (or even more disgraceful – playing the victim card for purely monetary motives).

Laurie Kelley is right to point out that our only knowledge of the case, its facts and the litigants comes from these stories. The Melbourne Sunday Herald Sun had, I believe, the full original story. And from it I’m willing to make some inferences.

I’m no lawyer but this couple doesn't appear to be suing for ‘breach of contract’. Meaning: they were not given a 100% guarantee of having a girl. This is supported in the Herald Sun story:

"They [Lawyers for Melbourne IVF] claim the couple was given and signed an IVF consent form and a embryo biopsy consent form which stated: "If a pregnancy is achieved from biopsied embryos, we understand that further diagnostic tests are recommended to confirm the early embryo diagnosis."

"The plaintiffs knew . . . that undergoing IVF and PGD did not guarantee a female fetus if a pregnancy were to occur and could result in the sort of injury, loss and damage about which the plaintiffs complain," court documents say.

"The plaintiffs agreed to undergo IVF and PGD with the full appreciation of the nature and extent of the risks involved."

And is it possible that tests and ultrasounds were inconclusive as to the gender of the baby? Sure. How many stories have we heard of people expecting a baby of one sex because of an ultrasound only to be blessed with a child of the opposite sex? Also, given the nature of the IVF selection in this case the baby’s sex was perhaps taken for granted, by everyone.

It’s a sad case on so many levels.

“And they are claiming money to cover medical expenses, because Jess will need treatment and care for life.”

Did they count on psychiatric help after Jess starts wondering why “Mum and Dad didn’t want a boy like me. So much they considered killing me before I was born.”

“The couple say that, had they known [the baby was a boy], they would have considered terminating the pregnancy.”

Of course I find the above quote entirely repugnant. It recalls an excerpt I read from Practical Ethics a book by Pete Singer, a so-called bioethicist from Princeton University.

“When the death of a disabled infant will lead to the birth of another infant with better prospects of a happy life, the total account of happiness will be greater if the disabled infant is killed. The loss of happy life for the first infant is outweighed by the gain of a happier life for the second. Therefore if killing the haemophiliac infant has no adverse impact on others, it would…be right to kill him.”

Infuriating and sad. Mostly sad.

It’s not the fact that this couple went to extraordinary lengths to have a hemophilia-free child, Allison and I had similar discussions before choosing to have another child and leave it up to God. But by pursuing this litigation this couple is demonstrating a clear resentment and disdain for the life of their son Jess. A life and condition shared by my son.

Like all children our boys with hemophilia are gifts. Gifts to be cherished and nurtured and loved. Each one with unique talents and abilities, needs and wants. They are undeniable gifts and constant sources of joy.

Jess is three now. And I hope his parents know, and he knows, that he is a gift and a joy.

Baseball...closer to home

This is Jack, my 8-year-old. Jack has severe hemophilia A but thanks to modern factor concentrates and prophylaxis he gets to do things like play baseball and basketball and soccer and swimming. And you know what (he says proudly), he's quite good.

Play Ball!

The line are chalked, the grass is trimmed and the red, white and blue bunting is hung with precision.

Baseball. America's pastime.

It's Opening Day of the 2008 Major League season.

Who's it going to be in October? Red Sox again? Yankees? Tigers?

Can the Braves rebound? Will it be the Mets? Can the Rocks surprise once more?

Or will it finally be the year for an Astros - Indians Matchup? I know. I won't hold my breath.