5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

**Admin** Tue May 10, 2011 2:53 pm

A Sister for Joshua

Mr. and Mrs. S are a successful young professional couple. They have two sons: Joshua, who is five years old, and Matthew, who is two.

Nine months ago, Joshua was diagnosed with Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia (ALL). He responded well to his initial chemotherapy and quickly went into remission. Last week, however, Josh's oncologist detected the early signs of a relapse of his leukemia. Although secondary therapy is available, it involves drugs with signficantly higher toxicity and much less certainty of a second remission. The oncologist has also told Mr. and Mrs. S about a research study that requires a bone marrow transplant and a new (experimental) drug that will aid engraftment and deter rejection.

Joshua's two-year old brother, Matthew, is not a histocompatible donor for the transplant. So the parents consider having another baby, and begin discussions with an endocrinologist who specializes in in vitro fertilization. The specialist explains the procedures for in vitro fertilization and pre-implantation genetic testing. If Mr. and Mrs. S have any incipient doubts about what they are doing, they do not raise them with one another. Their conversations are only about the process - about what is to be done next.

Mrs. S's eggs are retrieved and impregnated with Mr. S's sperm. Then, while tests are being made to discern histocompatibility with Joshua, an outspoken friend asks Mrs. S, "Are you having this new baby simply as a means to give Josh a new lease on life?" Mrs. S finds herself unable to answer immediately. "No," she says finally. "We are going to love this new baby all for herself, and she will be happy knowing that she has helped her older brother." But that afternoon, when she meets her husband at the clinic, she bursts into tears.

Answer both of the following:

1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?

2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

earthycolors Tue May 10, 2011 9:33 pm

1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?

2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

I think that Mr. and Mrs. S can resolve the conflict, but they would need the help of their neworn baby. I mean sure, it seems morally wrong, and telling the child as he/she matures that he/she was born for the sole purpose of helping his/her big brother will be hard to do, what in the end; I agree that he/she will be happy knowing that he/she saved the life of his/her big brother. The way I would tell him/her is I would just tell the truth, but not the raw truth. I would say that he/she was born to save the life of his/her brother, but I would also say that we love her/him unconditionally. At least I would still love him/her. Wow, if Josh were to die from the treatment, I honestly wouldn't know what to say. I would still love my baby and apoligize for putting him/her through all of this. I could imagine her/him feeling depressed and lonely. I would feel more guilty than depressed. This might be the case of an ethics consult because getting pregnant for the sole purpose of saving your first son would make for a poor reason to bring a new life into the world, it would be morally wrong in today's society; and me, if i was married and in the same situation, would think over this many, many, many times very hard and for hours at a time before I even considered doing this.

I couldn't imagine every child being born today only being born to help another person. The total self-esteem would be in the ground. Suicide rated would be sky high, probably one in every 7 or 8 children. Crime would be horrible and mostly done by kids because the kids would be like "Why should I care about these people, I bet some other new born would save them if they got shot." Kids would rebel and form unions. Basically, the world would be crime ridden by teenagers and young adults unless the countries form a bigger army to fight off rebelling kids.

soccergal93 Tue May 10, 2011 10:56 pm

1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?
2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

Answers:
1. This is a sad story. This is a very complicated situation and I'm sure no matter what decisions you'd make it would cause extreme mental and emotional stress for both Mr. and Mrs. S. I believe that the couple could resolve their conflict, meaning come to a conclusion that both of them are confident about. Marriage doesn't mean you have the same opinions or views, especially with matters like this, but it does mean that you should have a close enough relationship to keep conversations open and express exactly how you feel about the decisions you're making together. If both members of the couple aren't confident with and understand the reasoning behind their decision of "bringing a new life into the world to help prolong the life of a child that's already here", then how would they be able to provide an explanation to their daughter when she's old enough to start questioning things? They have to be sure of themselves and understand the thought processes they're using to get through this situation, otherwise, they could never have an open and honest relationship with their daughter in fear that saying too much would cause her to feel unwanted or insecure about herself or her reasons for being here. Mr. and Mrs. S have to mentally and emotionally prepare themselves for ALL possible outcomes, including the death of any one of their children, especially Josh. Otherwise, they wouldn't be prepared to talk to the daughter in a way that would ensure her it's not her fault her brother died, which is very important. If the parents feel guilty about anything they've done, that will surely show as the daughter matures and begins to understand more of what's been going on in her life. If something were to happen to any of the children throughout the next few years as a result of the things doctors recommended to the family, an ethics consultation could be necessary. If I were a parent, I would not make any decisions until both my partner and I were comfortable with the reasoning behind the choices we're making and confident that we're doing the right things to ensure the safety and the feelings of all of our children, and that what benefits one child will not take away from the opportunities of another.

2. If every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons, the world would be chaos. People would be naturally more selfish and self-concerned, careless, everything would go downhill. The self-esteem of all children as they become more mature would be cut down to almost nothing. What would be your worth if you were brought here only to benefit someone that was here before you? Our society would become an unstable mess. I don't think people would evolve to feel okay with this, depression would become more of an epidemic than it already is, nobody would feel loved, and I don't think anyone that's older would care to make the new lives feel like they're worth anything because their reason for being here isn't because someone wanted them, but only because someone needed to use them. Self-esteem would dissappear and I don't think anyone would have the energy to do anything, work, learn, make a difference, if everyone knew everyone was going to be around alot longer than normal anyway. Idk.. this just sounds like bad news.

smiley11 Wed May 11, 2011 12:19 am

1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?

2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

I think that they can resolve thir conflict. Its not really right to have another child just to save their 2 year old, but I also understand why they would do it. The talk with the child will be pretty tough. The child will think that they were only born to help their brother. She may think that it was her fault that her brother died, but in reality it wouldn't. It would be that his boy just didn't respond properly to the treatment. i might do this, depends on what the husband would want to do.

If this would br true, it would be terrible. The children would think that they dont really have a purpose in life. They will think that they are only here to help the people with this condition. Their self-esteem would be low because they don't really have a life of their own.

smiley11 Wed May 11, 2011 8:48 am

earthycolors wrote:1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?

2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

I think that Mr. and Mrs. S can resolve the conflict, but they would need the help of their neworn baby. I mean sure, it seems morally wrong, and telling the child as he/she matures that he/she was born for the sole purpose of helping his/her big brother will be hard to do, what in the end; I agree that he/she will be happy knowing that he/she saved the life of his/her big brother. The way I would tell him/her is I would just tell the truth, but not the raw truth. I would say that he/she was born to save the life of his/her brother, but I would also say that we love her/him unconditionally. At least I would still love him/her. Wow, if Josh were to die from the treatment, I honestly wouldn't know what to say. I would still love my baby and apoligize for putting him/her through all of this. I could imagine her/him feeling depressed and lonely. I would feel more guilty than depressed. This might be the case of an ethics consult because getting pregnant for the sole purpose of saving your first son would make for a poor reason to bring a new life into the world, it would be morally wrong in today's society; and me, if i was married and in the same situation, would think over this many, many, many times very hard and for hours at a time before I even considered doing this.

I couldn't imagine every child being born today only being born to help another person. The total self-esteem would be in the ground. Suicide rated would be sky high, probably one in every 7 or 8 children. Crime would be horrible and mostly done by kids because the kids would be like "Why should I care about these people, I bet some other new born would save them if they got shot." Kids would rebel and form unions. Basically, the world would be crime ridden by teenagers and young adults unless the countries form a bigger army to fight off rebelling kids.

I completely agree with you on both of these topics. I believe that they can resolve their conflict as well, it maybe hard but I think that they can do it. I think that it will be hard for them to explain what is happening and why the child is really here just to help her older brother. If Josh didn't respond to the treatment and die, I would tell her that it wasn't her fault that he died. The child will feel terrible and I also would try and help comfort them any way that I can.
I couldn't either. It would be terrible if children were only born to help other people live longer lives. Self-esteem issues would be in the ground and suicide would probably be a lot higher now if this is how society was today.

smiley11 Wed May 11, 2011 9:03 am

soccergal93 wrote:1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?
2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

Answers:
1. This is a sad story. This is a very complicated situation and I'm sure no matter what decisions you'd make it would cause extreme mental and emotional stress for both Mr. and Mrs. S. I believe that the couple could resolve their conflict, meaning come to a conclusion that both of them are confident about. Marriage doesn't mean you have the same opinions or views, especially with matters like this, but it does mean that you should have a close enough relationship to keep conversations open and express exactly how you feel about the decisions you're making together. If both members of the couple aren't confident with and understand the reasoning behind their decision of "bringing a new life into the world to help prolong the life of a child that's already here", then how would they be able to provide an explanation to their daughter when she's old enough to start questioning things? They have to be sure of themselves and understand the thought processes they're using to get through this situation, otherwise, they could never have an open and honest relationship with their daughter in fear that saying too much would cause her to feel unwanted or insecure about herself or her reasons for being here. Mr. and Mrs. S have to mentally and emotionally prepare themselves for ALL possible outcomes, including the death of any one of their children, especially Josh. Otherwise, they wouldn't be prepared to talk to the daughter in a way that would ensure her it's not her fault her brother died, which is very important. If the parents feel guilty about anything they've done, that will surely show as the daughter matures and begins to understand more of what's been going on in her life. If something were to happen to any of the children throughout the next few years as a result of the things doctors recommended to the family, an ethics consultation could be necessary. If I were a parent, I would not make any decisions until both my partner and I were comfortable with the reasoning behind the choices we're making and confident that we're doing the right things to ensure the safety and the feelings of all of our children, and that what benefits one child will not take away from the opportunities of another.

2. If every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons, the world would be chaos. People would be naturally more selfish and self-concerned, careless, everything would go downhill. The self-esteem of all children as they become more mature would be cut down to almost nothing. What would be your worth if you were brought here only to benefit someone that was here before you? Our society would become an unstable mess. I don't think people would evolve to feel okay with this, depression would become more of an epidemic than it already is, nobody would feel loved, and I don't think anyone that's older would care to make the new lives feel like they're worth anything because their reason for being here isn't because someone wanted them, but only because someone needed to use them. Self-esteem would disappear and I don't think anyone would have the energy to do anything, work, learn, make a difference, if everyone knew everyone was going to be around a lot longer than normal anyway. Idk.. this just sounds like bad news.

I agree with you. It would take a lot of thought and talking with my partner if I were to do this for my child. They can resolve their conflict if if they do feel really confident in their decision. The children of the societies self-esteem would be down tremendously if they are only used to save other peoples lives. The society would be chaos and there is nothing that we would be able to do to change how they feel and react to how they have to live.

animalluver Wed May 11, 2011 7:56 pm

1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?

2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

1. Mr. and Mrs. S may not be able to resolve the conflict. Even if they do go through with the procedure, one or both may later regret the decision to create a baby as a dispensable donor to their first born child and start to resent eachother and their family as a whole. As they explain to the child when she's old enough to ask about her birth, it can go one of two ways. She's either going to be glad that her life has meaning enough to save her brother, or she'll grow to believe her parents are only using her and that she's only a donor to them. In the case that Josh would react badly to the transplant and not pull through, then she would forever blame herself for the death of her brother because she wasn't able to save him the way she "should have." The ethics of this can be debated since the proceedure implies that one life is worth more than another, because it puts the new baby's life at risk (in case something should go wrong on her side of the transplant) in order to attempt to save Josh's life. Some might consider this unethical, including myself. However, put in this position, I'm not sure how I would react. I'm sure the situation is completely different from a parents point of view. On one hand, I wouldn't want to lose my child, but on the other hand, it's definately not okay to bring a life into the world, knowing you'll jeopardize that life to save one that's already slipping away, and may or may not be able to recover, even with the transplant.

2. If a child was concieved only to prolong other life, a life would mean next to nothing. A child would grow up to believe that the only reason they are alive is to save someone else's life that means more than theirs. People die when they were meant to die. When nature is ready to accept their return with open arms. Messing with a life is messing with nature, which isn't a good thing to do. How do you decide who's life is worth saving?

20north_star12 Wed May 11, 2011 11:03 pm

Admin wrote:A Sister for Joshua

1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?

I think that a baby should be born for other means than for experimental health. What happens if Mr. and Mrs. S can't financially afford another baby? I have no clue how they would begin to even explain this story to the baby, but I would hope that they would go about it in a way to let her know that she is loved regardless of what other circumstances were going on. I think that the baby girl would definitely feel as if she contributed because as young children, we tend to blame ourselves for faults that are not ours. I know I have with quite a few things. I think that the parents would feel stupid and as if the new baby didn't suffice for the intent they had and that this whole idea is not smart. I would not go through with this process. Either way, Joshua isn't garunteed survival, so why put another child's health at risk (the little girl's mental health) just to try to save another. It would be different if the baby had a choice. Every living person should have a choice in what to do with their body and all of its parts.

2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

I think that the world has enough problems, such as the worries that Earth won't be able to sustain as much life as projected by some. I don't think that babies need to be born as a means of prolonging another person's life. Everything happens for a reason, and happens as it should. This would be yet another example of man overstepping their boundaries. Our society would decline even further than it would. Children would negatively be affected. Society would turn into the one like "Brave New World" in that there would be childbirth for medical purposes and no longer because women want to express love and care for another being.

GummyBearLove Wed May 11, 2011 11:05 pm

1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?

This is a horrible story in general. I do believe that Mr. and Mrs. S can resolve their conflict. After all they are married. I think that although these arent the best situations, they do bring a family closer. They now have to worry about the situation more in depth and actually think about me. When the child gets old enough to know the circumstances of her birth, I think it would be a tough thing. When you have a child, you do instantly have a connection with that child, so even though that child was born initially to help out another sibling, The parents will still love and care for her the same. I think it would take her a little bit of time to actually accept that she was born originally to help a sibling and not just out of love but i think that she will soon realize that she came into the world helping someone out and feel better. If Josh responds poorly and dies I dont think she would worry too much about her contributing to his death. I think she would think more on the lines of she tried to help him and not hurt him. She didnt have a say into that situation so i dont think she will feel bad about contributing to it.

2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

I think that would be a terrible thing. I think people would be very depressed about this. There wouldnt be a real love connection between the parents and the child. I think this would result in a lot of suicide in society. Children would feel like they meant nothing to their parents and their self-esteem would be so low

londylou Wed May 11, 2011 11:45 pm

1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?

2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

1. There isnt anything they can do now if the eggs are already fertilized so they have no choice but to have the baby. When the baby is born, the right thing to do would be to tell her the truth, but that probably isnt going to happen. If Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies then the parents will just have to live with that. They shouldnt have been so selfish anyway. The child should not feel that she contributed to her brother's death because it wasnt her decision to be born in the first place. If I were the parent, I would try to find another family member that might be able to give him what he needs rather than get pregnant again and hope that the baby would be compatible.
2. It would be a shame if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons. That is one of the most selfish and ignorant things I've ever heard in my life. Obviously it would negativly effect the children's self esteem. Who wants to go through life knowing that they were born out of necessity and desperation instead of love?

shopaholic94 Thu May 12, 2011 1:00 am

1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?

2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

I think they can, but my solution is going to be realistic, sad but realistic. If they don't have a new baby, the possibilities of Josh surviving are very low. If Josh died, they will not be able to live with the question, what would have happened if we had had another baby? a sister who could have saved his life? Even in the case they had another baby and the treatment failed, the baby would not be responsible of his/her brother´s death because she/he was not concious of his/her actions, it wasn't the babies decision to be born just to save a life. It was the parents and they would be technically guilty. But that baby would sort of fill Josh´s space, which would do good to the family. If the baby were born and saved Josh's life, I would tell her as soon as she was capable of realizing what she had done. But I would never say that the only purpose of her existence was to save her brother. Before having a child you should have very clear that you NEVER use a human's life as the means to an end.
This case should be subject to an ethics consult because it is a decission you could reject for the rest of your life, and it is a very hard one. I woudl have a child, but first I would be sure to be determined to love that child no matter what happens and I would see the baby as a route to happiness, wanting to provide him/hher with the best i could afford, like any other of my children. If the treatment worked, I would love my baby. If it didn't I would NEVER blame it on the child. There is nobody to blame, it just simply didn't work but it was the option with the biggest range of godd results.

2-If every child was conceived because of that, the meaning of repudiction applied to the human been would be lost. We would not be reproducing to keep passing our genes and legacies, we would just be giving life to people who's purpose in life was already defined when they were born; we would just be objects to furfill a specific duty, means to an end. Children would take life less seriusly, because if we take into account that somebody would be born to heal us, and that that was our only purpose in life, we would deffinately be unhappy human beings way before reaching maturity.

snookieluvs2tan Thu May 12, 2011 5:57 pm

1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?

2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

I think Mr. and Mrs. S. can solve their problem. When the new baby is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth, they should tell her that yes, she was conceived to give her older brother a chance to survive cancer. But, they don't necessarily have to tell her that this was the only reason they conceived her. They could tell her that they wanted another baby, and that it just so happens that they also had a chance to help save Josh's life.This is the turth, and they should tell her. If Josh responds poorly to the treatment, then it's not the child's fault. It's like the thing with the punnett squares. She only has a certain percent chance of having certain traits to help out her sibling.
She shouldn't feel like she contributed to his death, if the parents tell her the "reason" why she was conceived.
This could be an ethics consult if the child was conceived, helped save her brother, then mistreated or abused because the couple wasn't necessarily ready for another baby. If I were the parent, I would try to exhaust all my other options before making a decision that could alter mine and my children's lives.
If every other child were used to help save lives, the self-esteem and self-worth of people in the world would be very low. People would feel like they were failures to loved ones. There would possibly a rise in depression, suicide, obesity, etc.
I dont really think it's absolutely "wrong" to have children for health purposes, I just think that whoever wants to try this needs to be aware of the risks and outcomes this type of decision makes.

MiszCheesekake41 Thu May 12, 2011 6:40 pm

1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?

I don't think they can really resolve their conflict. They both know the only reason their having another child is to save Josh and they need to accept that. Ethier way it goes there is a possilbilty of him dying. The baby shouldn't fell responsible for that the parents should because thay are the ones making the decisions. As the child gets older they need to make them feel loved and cared for just as much as the others. If I were the parent I would do whatever is less of a risk for Josh to die.

2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

If every child were concieved to prolong the lives of others they might feel they are the reason some people are alive and maybe feel important. But this may also lower their self esteem because the parents might not love and care for them as much. Some people might feel used and that the only reason they are alive is for the benefit of someone else.

MiszCheesekake41 Thu May 12, 2011 6:44 pm

earthycolors wrote:1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?

2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

I think that Mr. and Mrs. S can resolve the conflict, but they would need the help of their neworn baby. I mean sure, it seems morally wrong, and telling the child as he/she matures that he/she was born for the sole purpose of helping his/her big brother will be hard to do, what in the end; I agree that he/she will be happy knowing that he/she saved the life of his/her big brother. The way I would tell him/her is I would just tell the truth, but not the raw truth. I would say that he/she was born to save the life of his/her brother, but I would also say that we love her/him unconditionally. At least I would still love him/her. Wow, if Josh were to die from the treatment, I honestly wouldn't know what to say. I would still love my baby and apoligize for putting him/her through all of this. I could imagine her/him feeling depressed and lonely. I would feel more guilty than depressed. This might be the case of an ethics consult because getting pregnant for the sole purpose of saving your first son would make for a poor reason to bring a new life into the world, it would be morally wrong in today's society; and me, if i was married and in the same situation, would think over this many, many, many times very hard and for hours at a time before I even considered doing this.

I couldn't imagine every child being born today only being born to help another person. The total self-esteem would be in the ground. Suicide rated would be sky high, probably one in every 7 or 8 children. Crime would be horrible and mostly done by kids because the kids would be like "Why should I care about these people, I bet some other new born would save them if they got shot." Kids would rebel and form unions. Basically, the world would be crime ridden by teenagers and young adults unless the countries form a bigger army to fight off rebelling kids.

Omg thats a horrible thought. Sad

MiszCheesekake41 Thu May 12, 2011 6:48 pm

soccergal93 wrote:1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?
2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

Answers:
1. This is a sad story. This is a very complicated situation and I'm sure no matter what decisions you'd make it would cause extreme mental and emotional stress for both Mr. and Mrs. S. I believe that the couple could resolve their conflict, meaning come to a conclusion that both of them are confident about. Marriage doesn't mean you have the same opinions or views, especially with matters like this, but it does mean that you should have a close enough relationship to keep conversations open and express exactly how you feel about the decisions you're making together. If both members of the couple aren't confident with and understand the reasoning behind their decision of "bringing a new life into the world to help prolong the life of a child that's already here", then how would they be able to provide an explanation to their daughter when she's old enough to start questioning things? They have to be sure of themselves and understand the thought processes they're using to get through this situation, otherwise, they could never have an open and honest relationship with their daughter in fear that saying too much would cause her to feel unwanted or insecure about herself or her reasons for being here. Mr. and Mrs. S have to mentally and emotionally prepare themselves for ALL possible outcomes, including the death of any one of their children, especially Josh. Otherwise, they wouldn't be prepared to talk to the daughter in a way that would ensure her it's not her fault her brother died, which is very important. If the parents feel guilty about anything they've done, that will surely show as the daughter matures and begins to understand more of what's been going on in her life. If something were to happen to any of the children throughout the next few years as a result of the things doctors recommended to the family, an ethics consultation could be necessary. If I were a parent, I would not make any decisions until both my partner and I were comfortable with the reasoning behind the choices we're making and confident that we're doing the right things to ensure the safety and the feelings of all of our children, and that what benefits one child will not take away from the opportunities of another.

2. If every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons, the world would be chaos. People would be naturally more selfish and self-concerned, careless, everything would go downhill. The self-esteem of all children as they become more mature would be cut down to almost nothing. What would be your worth if you were brought here only to benefit someone that was here before you? Our society would become an unstable mess. I don't think people would evolve to feel okay with this, depression would become more of an epidemic than it already is, nobody would feel loved, and I don't think anyone that's older would care to make the new lives feel like they're worth anything because their reason for being here isn't because someone wanted them, but only because someone needed to use them. Self-esteem would dissappear and I don't think anyone would have the energy to do anything, work, learn, make a difference, if everyone knew everyone was going to be around alot longer than normal anyway. Idk.. this just sounds like bad news.

People all over the world,join hands...start a love train! Love train!!!!

snookieluvs2tan Fri May 13, 2011 8:19 pm

earthycolors wrote:1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?

2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

I think that Mr. and Mrs. S can resolve the conflict, but they would need the help of their neworn baby. I mean sure, it seems morally wrong, and telling the child as he/she matures that he/she was born for the sole purpose of helping his/her big brother will be hard to do, what in the end; I agree that he/she will be happy knowing that he/she saved the life of his/her big brother. The way I would tell him/her is I would just tell the truth, but not the raw truth. I would say that he/she was born to save the life of his/her brother, but I would also say that we love her/him unconditionally. At least I would still love him/her. Wow, if Josh were to die from the treatment, I honestly wouldn't know what to say. I would still love my baby and apoligize for putting him/her through all of this. I could imagine her/him feeling depressed and lonely. I would feel more guilty than depressed. This might be the case of an ethics consult because getting pregnant for the sole purpose of saving your first son would make for a poor reason to bring a new life into the world, it would be morally wrong in today's society; and me, if i was married and in the same situation, would think over this many, many, many times very hard and for hours at a time before I even considered doing this.

I couldn't imagine every child being born today only being born to help another person. The total self-esteem would be in the ground. Suicide rated would be sky high, probably one in every 7 or 8 children. Crime would be horrible and mostly done by kids because the kids would be like "Why should I care about these people, I bet some other new born would save them if they got shot." Kids would rebel and form unions. Basically, the world would be crime ridden by teenagers and young adults unless the countries form a bigger army to fight off rebelling kids.

I agree that the parents should love their child unconditionally, but sometimes, the raw truth is what is necessary, because then the child will always wonder if the parents were lying or not.

snookieluvs2tan Fri May 13, 2011 8:23 pm

soccergal93 wrote:1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?
2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

Answers:
1. This is a sad story. This is a very complicated situation and I'm sure no matter what decisions you'd make it would cause extreme mental and emotional stress for both Mr. and Mrs. S. I believe that the couple could resolve their conflict, meaning come to a conclusion that both of them are confident about. Marriage doesn't mean you have the same opinions or views, especially with matters like this, but it does mean that you should have a close enough relationship to keep conversations open and express exactly how you feel about the decisions you're making together. If both members of the couple aren't confident with and understand the reasoning behind their decision of "bringing a new life into the world to help prolong the life of a child that's already here", then how would they be able to provide an explanation to their daughter when she's old enough to start questioning things? They have to be sure of themselves and understand the thought processes they're using to get through this situation, otherwise, they could never have an open and honest relationship with their daughter in fear that saying too much would cause her to feel unwanted or insecure about herself or her reasons for being here. Mr. and Mrs. S have to mentally and emotionally prepare themselves for ALL possible outcomes, including the death of any one of their children, especially Josh. Otherwise, they wouldn't be prepared to talk to the daughter in a way that would ensure her it's not her fault her brother died, which is very important. If the parents feel guilty about anything they've done, that will surely show as the daughter matures and begins to understand more of what's been going on in her life. If something were to happen to any of the children throughout the next few years as a result of the things doctors recommended to the family, an ethics consultation could be necessary. If I were a parent, I would not make any decisions until both my partner and I were comfortable with the reasoning behind the choices we're making and confident that we're doing the right things to ensure the safety and the feelings of all of our children, and that what benefits one child will not take away from the opportunities of another.

2. If every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons, the world would be chaos. People would be naturally more selfish and self-concerned, careless, everything would go downhill. The self-esteem of all children as they become more mature would be cut down to almost nothing. What would be your worth if you were brought here only to benefit someone that was here before you? Our society would become an unstable mess. I don't think people would evolve to feel okay with this, depression would become more of an epidemic than it already is, nobody would feel loved, and I don't think anyone that's older would care to make the new lives feel like they're worth anything because their reason for being here isn't because someone wanted them, but only because someone needed to use them. Self-esteem would dissappear and I don't think anyone would have the energy to do anything, work, learn, make a difference, if everyone knew everyone was going to be around alot longer than normal anyway. Idk.. this just sounds like bad news.

I like how you say what marriage should be about, and i agree with you; couples should make decisions not just for the present, but for the long term, and they both need to feel absolutely sure about their decision.

shopaholic94 Fri May 13, 2011 11:01 pm

londylou wrote:1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?

2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

1. There isnt anything they can do now if the eggs are already fertilized so they have no choice but to have the baby. When the baby is born, the right thing to do would be to tell her the truth, but that probably isnt going to happen. If Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies then the parents will just have to live with that. They shouldnt have been so selfish anyway. The child should not feel that she contributed to her brother's death because it wasnt her decision to be born in the first place. If I were the parent, I would try to find another family member that might be able to give him what he needs rather than get pregnant again and hope that the baby would be compatible.
2. It would be a shame if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons. That is one of the most selfish and ignorant things I've ever heard in my life. Obviously it would negativly effect the children's self esteem. Who wants to go through life knowing that they were born out of necessity and desperation instead of love?

I agree with you about being selfish. You should not have a baby just because you want to save your first child's life. You should have a baby because you want to have a baby. In the case you did actually have a baby to be able to save your other son, you should at least be 100% sure of what you are doing, and that no matter what happens you are going to love your next child like you would love the other one. But in a way, I don't think that letting the first child die is fair too. I think I could never live with the thought of: "What would have happened if we had had another child?"
And of course, in case anything went wrong, the new baby would be a reason to keep going rather tha giving up. With neither both babies, what have you got left?
But I strongly disagree about having other people form your family have a baby just for your cause. If you are not willing to sacrifice yourself, why are you going to annoy others? As far as I know children don't fall from the sky like heavy rain on a claudy day. It will be your only responsibility and it should not affect directly to undirect members of your family.

shopaholic94 Fri May 13, 2011 11:05 pm

snookieluvs2tan wrote:
earthycolors wrote:1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?

2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

I think that Mr. and Mrs. S can resolve the conflict, but they would need the help of their neworn baby. I mean sure, it seems morally wrong, and telling the child as he/she matures that he/she was born for the sole purpose of helping his/her big brother will be hard to do, what in the end; I agree that he/she will be happy knowing that he/she saved the life of his/her big brother. The way I would tell him/her is I would just tell the truth, but not the raw truth. I would say that he/she was born to save the life of his/her brother, but I would also say that we love her/him unconditionally. At least I would still love him/her. Wow, if Josh were to die from the treatment, I honestly wouldn't know what to say. I would still love my baby and apoligize for putting him/her through all of this. I could imagine her/him feeling depressed and lonely. I would feel more guilty than depressed. This might be the case of an ethics consult because getting pregnant for the sole purpose of saving your first son would make for a poor reason to bring a new life into the world, it would be morally wrong in today's society; and me, if i was married and in the same situation, would think over this many, many, many times very hard and for hours at a time before I even considered doing this.

I couldn't imagine every child being born today only being born to help another person. The total self-esteem would be in the ground. Suicide rated would be sky high, probably one in every 7 or 8 children. Crime would be horrible and mostly done by kids because the kids would be like "Why should I care about these people, I bet some other new born would save them if they got shot." Kids would rebel and form unions. Basically, the world would be crime ridden by teenagers and young adults unless the countries form a bigger army to fight off rebelling kids.

I agree that the parents should love their child unconditionally, but sometimes, the raw truth is what is necessary, because then the child will always wonder if the parents were lying or not.

I know that this is going to sound wrong, but at least the baby had once a clear purpose. We, as human beings, have no purpose (at least if you are not religious). The lack of meaning scares us to death, and I think that an educated child would some day be able to understand that the parents wanted to save her brother, and that they love her at the same time, no matter what her existence has done to change their lifes. You should love a person for what it is to you, not as the mean to an end; a mission that when completed will leave no purpose at all for what it is to come.

londylou Fri May 13, 2011 11:35 pm

[quote="earthycolors"]Crime would be horrible and mostly done by kids because the kids would be like "Why should I care about these people, I bet some other new born would save them if they got shot."[quote]

Great point. I never thought about it that way. If I were born for the sole purpose of saving a sibling, I would rebel too!

londylou Fri May 13, 2011 11:40 pm

animalluver wrote:1. Mr. and Mrs. S may not be able to resolve the conflict. Even if they do go through with the procedure, one or both may later regret the decision to create a baby as a dispensable donor to their first born child and start to resent eachother and their family as a whole.

Exactly! And what if the baby isnt a match for her brother either? Will the parents still love her and treat her like a member of the family, or will their disappointment consume them?

earthycolors Sat May 14, 2011 2:57 pm

smiley11 wrote:1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?

2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

I think that they can resolve thir conflict. Its not really right to have another child just to save their 2 year old, but I also understand why they would do it. The talk with the child will be pretty tough. The child will think that they were only born to help their brother. She may think that it was her fault that her brother died, but in reality it wouldn't. It would be that his boy just didn't respond properly to the treatment. i might do this, depends on what the husband would want to do.

If this would br true, it would be terrible. The children would think that they dont really have a purpose in life. They will think that they are only here to help the people with this condition. Their self-esteem would be low because they don't really have a life of their own.

I aggree with you on what you said. I, too, think that kid's would be really sad and they'll feel like there is no purpose in life. I also agree that the S's would have a very hard time telling the child the reason he/she was born. It would be all bad.

earthycolors Sat May 14, 2011 3:01 pm

animalluver wrote:1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?

2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?

1. Mr. and Mrs. S may not be able to resolve the conflict. Even if they do go through with the procedure, one or both may later regret the decision to create a baby as a dispensable donor to their first born child and start to resent eachother and their family as a whole. As they explain to the child when she's old enough to ask about her birth, it can go one of two ways. She's either going to be glad that her life has meaning enough to save her brother, or she'll grow to believe her parents are only using her and that she's only a donor to them. In the case that Josh would react badly to the transplant and not pull through, then she would forever blame herself for the death of her brother because she wasn't able to save him the way she "should have." The ethics of this can be debated since the proceedure implies that one life is worth more than another, because it puts the new baby's life at risk (in case something should go wrong on her side of the transplant) in order to attempt to save Josh's life. Some might consider this unethical, including myself. However, put in this position, I'm not sure how I would react. I'm sure the situation is completely different from a parents point of view. On one hand, I wouldn't want to lose my child, but on the other hand, it's definately not okay to bring a life into the world, knowing you'll jeopardize that life to save one that's already slipping away, and may or may not be able to recover, even with the transplant.

2. If a child was concieved only to prolong other life, a life would mean next to nothing. A child would grow up to believe that the only reason they are alive is to save someone else's life that means more than theirs. People die when they were meant to die. When nature is ready to accept their return with open arms. Messing with a life is messing with nature, which isn't a good thing to do. How do you decide who's life is worth saving?

I like the last sentence you used in Italics. It leaves the reader wondering. But I like the whole answer too. Such a well thought out one. I agree with what you said, the parents would be in a very, very tough spot. and the kid may either resent the family and herself or be happy that he/she save his/her brother's life.

Love_Muffins Mon May 23, 2011 12:53 pm

1. Can Mr. and Mrs. S resolve their conflict? How will they talk to the new baby when she is old enough to ask about the circumstances of her birth? What if Josh responds poorly to the transplant and dies? Will she feel that she contributed to her brother's death? Under what conditions might this case be the subject of an ethics consult? What would you decide if you were the parent?
i think they can resolve their conflict. They jus have to think really hard about it. I think they will sugar code it to make her feel lik a super hero or something. I think if he dies she will feel like it was because of her. I think it will be a subject of an ethics consult. I dont know what i would do if i were in their shoes. its hard to say.

2. What if every child were conceived as a means to prolong the life of other living persons? What would this do to our society and to the self-esteem of children as they progress to maturity?
I think the value of birth and of a baby will go down. The kids willl feel worthless and society as a whole would be jacked up.

Sponsored content

5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

aww...sad story :(

04/18/10 <--- REGRETTING IT :/

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

We're burnin down the highway skyline on the back of a hurricane that started turnin when you were young

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua

Re: 5th Hour - Bioethics - A Sister for Joshua