Monday, July 20, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(46)
-
▼
July
(13)
- Health Care Systems (PP12)
- Alternative Medicine (PP11)
- Animal Rights Extremism (PP10)
- Should Healthcare Be Rationed? (PP9)
- Organ Transplants - Child Donors (PP8)
- Creating a Life to Save a Life (PP7)
- Right to Refuse Treatment (PP6)
- Stem Cell Research (PP5)
- Conscience Laws and the Rights of Individuals (PP4)
- Roe v Wade (PP3)
- Ethical and Religious Directives - Beginning of Li...
- Ethical and Religious Directives - Care for the Dy...
- Welcome Summer PHI213 Students!
-
▼
July
(13)
About Me
- dsm
- Biostatistician, Biology and Philosophy Faculty, Lacrosse Addict
Posts
12 comments:
I don’t think there is any problem with a baby born through stem-cell research if the parents are only using material from the umbilical cord in order to save his brother’s life. I understand where the Catholic Church is coming from, because they consider life the most precious gift. But on the other hand, they should understand that we are not talking about killing or using important parts out of the newborn child. I saw the film “My Sister’s Keeper,” and that was a totally different situation, because in the movie, the healthy child was used by the parents as a donor for the sick child many times. It was like she was a used car being used for spare parts. In the Spanish case, the umbilical cord would only be used for important purposes, like saving a child’s life. As long as the newborn baby is kept alive, and the parents do not use him for spare parts, I believe the parents made the right choice.
I don’t think that the parents should have made a baby just to save the other child. The poor child will go through so many mental problems not know that they were wanted, and just knowing why they are born in the first place. I don’t think people are thinking clearly before suggesting these ideas. It would be one thing if it did not mean making this baby the way they are instead of the natural way. If your child is sick and you have explored other options then trying to conceive a baby normally instead on engineering a baby. It boarders so many ethical wrongs I believe.
I see nothing wrong with creating a child (for stem cell in cord blood) to save a child, as long as that child that is conceived is loved, cared for, and nurtured in the same manner as the sick child. I do however believe that children should not be conceived for “spare parts,” and physicians need to clearly outline not only the possible positive outcome that will hopefully arise from the creation of the new child, but also as many if not all of the possible risks, complications, and additional procedures that might be needed if the cord blood doesn’t work. I believe this could be a very positive experience for both children involved as long as the parents stay equally focused and loving with both children and not just the sick child. Children are conceived through planning, by accident, and sometimes by complete mistake. I use the word “mistake” because it has a more negative undertone. Children who are conceived “by accident” are still loved and wanted by the parents, their timing was simply not planned, but when kids are conceived as a “mistake,” this sends the message that they are not even wanted. In a sense, if the parents could go back in time, they would have changed their actions that created the “mistake.” I believe a child would feel worse growing up thinking they were a “mistake” that shouldn’t have happened rather than created out of love, not only to help the sick child, but because they are truly wanted as an individual. At least a child being brought into this world with a purpose already knows that they weren’t a mistake and that by simply being born, they are saving lives. The possible moral consideration to be take into account is was that child brought into this world solely to save the life of a sibling? The answer is yes, but it is the actions of the parents following that birth that deem the situation ethical or unethical. If the parents treat the new child like Anna was treated in My Sister’s Keeper, then the parents are acting unethical and not in the best interest for either child, but if the parents are loving, caring, supportive, and nurturing to both children, than there is nothing unethical about the situation.
In this particular case where the baby is engineer to help cure his brother by donating material from his umbilical cord is fine in my opinion. I think if baby born through stem-cell selection is not affected in anyway that he might suffer health issues or his life is in danger I believe that it's aright because it would be saving his brother life. As the article was saying the brother suffer from beta-thalassaemia a form of anemia. This kind of disease requires regularly blood transfusions which they said that the brother of only 6 years can die from hearth attack before reaching 35 years old. If I were in the parent's shoes I would do anything and search every possibility to find a cure for my child and if the only way to be able to save my child was by creating another baby I will only if the baby is not at risk. It’s very easy to judge when you have nothing to do with this case but personally, I will do anything that I can to protect my child of course not in the intention of putting at risk another human being. I respect the views of the Romanic Catholic Church religious perspective; because I believe God doesn’t want us to be playing around with creating being's only for the reason of saving another being. I think theirs a lot to put into consideration; medical situation, political, religion views, and how does it affect the people who are involved but theirs cases to cases and with this case I agree with the decision made. We have to see the big picture and think if I were in the parent’s situation what is the decision I will make?
With regards to the subject at hand I am going to say I do not think it is ethical to engineer another child so that one can be saved. I do not know enough about how they select stem cells to create another baby but it is giving me the feeling that if there was some selection going on than some eggs were picked and chose from resulting in eggs not being used, that is just too much for me to agree with. I hate to say it but even if they had another child naturally and they were able to use the stem cells of the new child to help the old child I am against it. It involves altering genes I am not a fan of one playing around with genes. I do not think it was meant to be for us humans to figure out and change gene sequences. That was God’s job initially and evolution to finish carrying it out.
I disagree with the parent’s decision in this case of the Spanish stem cell baby created specifically to save the life of his brother. Creating the perfect child is unethical in many ways. These parents inquired about this procedure so it is obvious they did some research. When a parent decides to go though with this type of procedure, they usually don’t think about the quality of life the child they are creating will have, but more of the life of their sick child. In desperate measures a parent will do just about anything to save their child, not considering the consequences that may follow. I truly understand why a parent would do such a thing. No parent wants to out live their child.
Yes, creating a child to save a child is unethical because is it alters nature, beauty of conception and the work of God. It is unethical when the child that’s created, quality of life decreases especially after all the poking, pricking, surgeries, and test that have to be done. It’s unethical to compromise that child social, physical, emotional, and mental wellbeing of that child as well. Society will not take it easy on that child.
If this procedure is decided upon, those parents will have to seriously sit down and prepare this child for the negativity that will follow when he/she is of age. If this child decides not to continue to go through with donating then those parents should honor their wishes, not honoring their wish would also be unethical. What that child wants and decides is important as well. Yes, it will be sad that those parents might end up loosing that first child, but that’s a part of life and it has to be accepted. When God calls you home there is nothing that can be done as we all know.
This case of Javier the Spanish stem cell baby created specifically to save his brother andres life is acceptable. The family made a legal and thought out decision to bring another soul into this world at the same time allowing the oldest access to Javier;s umbilical cord fluid which was tested and free of anemia. The material from javier could save andres life. The question becomes at would price does javier pay for this medical procedure in his future i think the risk outweighs the rewards of saving their eldest son.
The catholic church deeply opposes the legalization of stem cell research. Their opinion is that one should not kill another human being to save another. Spain in my eyes is allowing mothers and family's to make their own decisions allowing freedom from the church's strong opposition. What shaped my opinion is that the family is only using the umbilical cord sparing javier life altering complications. It is not such an extreme scenario that I believe the church is portraying. in the media. What is lost throughout this discussion is that a life may possibly be saved. now as a parent the decision made by the family is just morally. The have not made an easy nor popular decision, yet they will hopefully have two sons healthy that can lead a long life.
Personally I disagree with the idea of creating a life to only benefit another life. Though baby Javier is free of Thalassemia unlike his brother, there is no definitive proof that his stem cells will cure him of his disease entirely. Doctors have pointed out that stem cells from the baby’s umbilical cord MAY cure Andres and have noted that without the bone marrow transplant, Andres COULD possibly die from heart problems by age 35. Regardless of Andres’s treatment no one can say for sure what the outcome will be for his future. What if the parents had created another child who would also be born with Thalassemia? Would the parents then abort that child for the mere reason that he would not a suitable donor for their ill child? How would the parents contend with the psychological impact on the donor child knowing that he was created for spare parts? If the bone marrow transplant proves to be unsuccessful with this child will they just go back to the drawing board and create another child until they get it right? I do agree with the use of stem cells for donation and stem cell research, as long as the stem cells are derived from already existing stem cell lines or from donated embryos that would otherwise be destroyed. As I do not agree that embryos be created specifically for stem cell use I certainly do not agree a life should be created for any or all donations. Had baby Javier already been born before the idea of using his stem cells came about then I would agree with using his stem cells but creating his life for the purpose of his donation is where the line must be drawn.
Creating a life to save a life is a parent’s choice. The only time I do not agree is when the treatments are extreme, killing or causing immense suffering for the new child. I am not a parent so I can not say what it would be like to have a very ill child that is ultimately going to die and being helpless to stop it. In the case of the Spanish couple genetically creating a child for its cord blood stem cells, I think the parents made the correct decision. The procedure is not invasive to the baby. If a bone marrow transplant is needed in the future, it will be temporary painful but not terribly horrible. As long as the parents don’t go too far, like the case in My Sister’s Keeper, I feel these parents had every right to create a new child.
Moral considerations in this case are more or less based on personal beliefs. Some people believe in vitro fertilization is morally wrong, especially many religious groups. Sex is not involved in creating the new life which offends the Catholic Church. Many feel that abortion or embryo destruction is immoral. It is unclear how many embryos this couple destroyed before the correct genetic match was created. Another concern may be the medical procedures that may later result for the new child if the cord blood does not help his brother.
Regardless of others personal beliefs, I believe in the right to privacy, personal choice, and abortion. If this family wanted another child without the same disease, not to help its brother but to be free of the genetic disease, I don’t think it would be as much of a “problem” for many. Religious groups and pro-life groups would still be up in arms, but others may have a different opinion. I think it doesn’t matter either way. The new child is free of a terrible disease, will be loved, and may be able to save his big brothers life. Again, I am not morally opposed unless the parents take it too far with repeated painful procedures or life altering surgeries.
So one day,man through God's given intelligence discovered that he could save lives through medicine,but wait!he couldn't stop there.He pushed the envelop and soon discovered that he could actually,mysteriously create one.What a wonderful discovery?Through out history,humans has been wrecked to self destruction due to their immorality and selfishness.They always think about themselves and not the other person,and see what this has led to?Stem cell research,genetic engineered children,or as some calls it,the future of human beings.God has a reason and a purpose for every human being,this is true as depicted in many religious texts, one of which is the Holy Bible.
In this case,the parents and the doctors involved provoked all moral ethics there is to even think that it was alright to create a baby to save another.It was beyond what is right and they had no justification whatsoever.It was like stealing from Paul to pay peter,or is it the other way round?.In my own view,i see no problem in the parents deciding to try and give birth to a second child the natural way in the hopes that the child will be a suitable match to save the sick brother.Stem cell research with cord blood,mature stem cells or embryos that have not developed into human form should be explored at all means for the sake of saving human life,for all i know it could be the difference between life and death for a loved one.Engineering so called stem cell babies for the sole purpose of harvesting bone marrow,organs and blood transfusions goes beyond the known value for human life.The parents acted out of selfishness and blinded love for the sick baby and there was a good possibility that the stem cell kid would be downplayed.I do sympathize with the parents and feel their desperation,but for God's sake,there is always the right way to do things,after all,humans are not immortal.The doctors shouldn't suggest such a choice to these parents,unless they had other motives other than saving the poor baby.The risks far outweigh the benefits by a huge margin,and ,unless we all have turned in to evil beings,its against all ethics!
I don't think that it is ok to have a child for the purpose of saving your other child. Eventhough they only want to use the umbilical cord thats fine, however the lady is having a baby created just for that purpose not because she wanted to have a child out of love. Which makes you wonder is the chiid being made thats gonna help his brother be loved evenly would the parents do that for that child as well if he needed something or was sick. I mean these are the things I think of when I hear of people having another child to help their other child. I have a son and would do anything to try and help him as long as it doesn't involve me in having another child created just to help him. If the lady was already pregnant at this time I would have no problem with her usung her umbilical cord to aid her other child. She wasn't already pregnant though and just going to get pregnant for that one purpose only not because she wanted a baby out of love.
I don't see issues dealing with creating a life for that reason of helping another life to the extent that doesn't violate that new persons quality of life. I think that the use of the umbilical cord cells could be used or other ways that would non evasive. Beyond the use out side of that I think the person that comes from the creation I think that person is there own and should be protected as such.
Post a Comment