|
|
|
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 9:53:42 AM
|
|
|
bolt.
Posts: 1759
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: Canada
Status: offline
|
quote:
If I'm having children for any reason other than viewing them as created by God, gifts given undeservedly, and treasures to be cherished for themselves and not what they can do for me or someone else, then my attitude is wrong and needs to be changed.
So you don't think children are born to be productive members of society, to become husbands and wives, to be worshipers of their Creator, or to otherwise be people in this world that do good stuff?
That's odd to me. Of course I value children for just-being and I love them unconditionally, but I'm pretty sure there is more to it, as far as my expectations for their lives.
I see all humans as having role, place, purpose, and duty -- most of which don't start at birth, but on occasion, such as donation, I feel that some duties as a human apply to a baby.
_____________________________
Are you having trouble getting your daily dose of the life changing Word of God?
Let my friend Brian at Daily Audio Bible help you too.
>>audio link<<
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 10:40:49 AM
|
|
|
W.O.F.
Posts: 1653
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: an ignoble beginning
Status: offline
|
To me this discussion is going round and round....it all depends, to me, on if this is an already existing child or one who is yet to be conceived.
I read the true life story of the Aiello (sp?) family who are the rough basis for this story....and their act of deliberately conceiving a child for the sole purpose of getting a bone marrow match for their older daughter opened up this type of thinking...that maybe children can be used for spare parts....
I think the problem lies in that there are people who view children as little more than accessories, as little more than something to serve us....
another problem is the ethical view of how embryos are treated...here is a real life story on a similar strain:
Baby bred to provide stem cells
_____________________________
Live your life in such a way that when your feet hit the floor in the morning, Satan shudders and says, "Oh no, she's awake."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 11:32:14 AM
|
|
|
OneOfHisJewels
Posts: 2626
Joined: 8/9/2007
From: out of the everywhere into here
Status: offline
|
quote:
So you don't think children are born to be productive members of society, to become husbands and wives, to be worshipers of their Creator, or to otherwise be people in this world that do good stuff?
My disabled sister can't do any of that (29yo at 4month level)..well, she may worship the Creator in ways I don't know about but she can't actively do any of that stuff..yet she still has a life purpose...also, I've never been married, so thus far, I wasn't born to become a wife (yet, anyway).
Our church has chatechism for children (no we're not catholic).
Q 1. Who made you?
A. God
Q.2. What else did God make?
A. God made all things
Q. 3. Why did God make you and all things?
A. For his own glory
_____________________________
Wizard's rule #1 .People can be stupid and willfully deceived (that's from the book, not the show)..slightly edited for CW
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 12:19:09 PM
|
|
|
WhiteRoseBlessings
Posts: 18172
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Here . . . but subject to change; stay tuned
Status: offline
|
Rebekah, your post makes some most excellent points.
quote:
ORIGINAL: bolt.
That's odd to me. Of course I value children for just-being and I love them unconditionally, but I'm pretty sure there is more to it, as far as my expectations for their lives. What about Our Lord's expectations for their lives; what if HIS expectations differ from yours?
quote:
ORIGINAL: bolt.
I see all humans as having role, place, purpose, and duty -- most of which don't start at birth, but on occasion, such as donation, I feel that some duties as a human apply to a baby. I do agree that all humans have a role, and a place and a purpose. I do not agree that all humans have duties; and I most certainly do not agree that a baby has duties.
_____________________________
❖ Let's Discuss the Advent Season ❖
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 12:32:57 PM
|
|
|
Memaw.
Posts: 1579
Joined: 1/29/2007
From: Sunflower State
Status: offline
|
I think the issue is that when a child is conceived solely for the purpose of helping another child, what happens when that childs' purpose is fulfilled?
In the book, the healthy sister brought up concerns that after all the donations there would be "nothing left of me".
If any of us were to have an ill child and one of our (minor) healthy children were able yet unwilling to donate, would we have the right as parents to force them or guilt them into donation?
_____________________________
If you don't believe King Jesus and his saints will be riding white horses when he returns to the earth, then you can just walk and I will ride.
John G. Hall
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 12:37:54 PM
|
|
|
WhiteRoseBlessings
Posts: 18172
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Here . . . but subject to change; stay tuned
Status: offline
|
Good Question, Memaw.
I would say no; the parents do not have a right to force the child to donate. Children are not property of their parents for the parents to do whatever they want with them.
_____________________________
❖ Let's Discuss the Advent Season ❖
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 12:41:54 PM
|
|
|
StephK
Posts: 2780
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Southwest Louisiana
Status: offline
|
I read the book a couple months ago and am familiar with the several real life cases of parents purposefully having children to save their sick child. Personally I believe that it crosses several moral and ethical lines. After reading the book I think that if a child is a match and is old enough to have doubts about being the donor there should be a guardian ad litem provided who will put the "donor" child's best interest first since the parents aren't honestly able to do so.
It's a slippery slope to create people for spare parts.
_____________________________
Stephanie
Envy is always referred to by its political alias, "social justice."
~ Thomas Sowell
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 12:45:40 PM
|
|
|
BlessedMamaofmany
Posts: 1710
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Just north of nowhere
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: StephK
It's a slippery slope to create people for spare parts.
I think that's a great summery. Once we accept it morally and ethically...them comes early prenatal genetic testing...no match? Abort and try again.
While I do believe that *many* parents would love the children the same...it's just a moral boundary I'm not willing to cross.
_____________________________
Atheism: The belief that there was nothing, nothing happened to nothing, then nothing magically exploded for no reason, creating everything, then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself into self-replicating bits that then turned into dinosaurs
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 1:43:53 PM
|
|
|
Sideways
Posts: 3368
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
I hear the "slippery slope" phrase applied a lot to arguments here, and I generally don't like it as an argument tool. A lot of situations can become immoral/unethical when taken to a wild extreme, but as intelligent human beings it's up to us not to let that happen. Now, I accept that we're all going to have different lines in the sand for what is best for our own families.
I just don't agree with the idea that because a family has one more baby then they were originally planning, in the hopes that the new baby might be a donor (while loving the new baby all the same), then they are opening the door for mass abortions and sub-humans who are treated like extra body parts.
I'm pretty certain that the families who did have another baby would be pretty hurt by the idea that because their baby donated bone marrow, that makes them nothing more then "spare parts".
_____________________________
Row, row, row your boat, gently down the stream. If you see a crocodile, don't forget to scream.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 2:01:44 PM
|
|
|
StephK
Posts: 2780
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Southwest Louisiana
Status: offline
|
If we don't look at it with the possibility of abuse down the road then we are being foolish. The one family in Colorado had 15 embryos created and then screened to make sure they were a match. Only two met the requirements. They were implanted and only one survived.
_____________________________
Stephanie
Envy is always referred to by its political alias, "social justice."
~ Thomas Sowell
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 2:15:35 PM
|
|
|
W.O.F.
Posts: 1653
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: an ignoble beginning
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Sideways
I hear the "slippery slope" phrase applied a lot to arguments here, and I generally don't like it as an argument tool. A lot of situations can become immoral/unethical when taken to a wild extreme, but as intelligent human beings it's up to us not to let that happen. Now, I accept that we're all going to have different lines in the sand for what is best for our own families.
I just don't agree with the idea that because a family has one more baby then they were originally planning, in the hopes that the new baby might be a donor (while loving the new baby all the same), then they are opening the door for mass abortions and sub-humans who are treated like extra body parts.
I'm pretty certain that the families who did have another baby would be pretty hurt by the idea that because their baby donated bone marrow, that makes them nothing more then "spare parts".
I think MOST families would have another child and would love that child for themselves...even if originally the intent was to save another child.
The problem lies in the fact that, as shown by the article I posted and another similar situation in Denmark (read it HERE).
Normally the slippery slope argument is risky at best, but as we can see by these two examples, and by the fact this novel was even written, people are concerned about this "slope"...and many people do not see any ethical or moral dilemmas in creating and destroying embryos that are a match for another sick child.
I would never say to a family that conceived a child in hopes of saving another child that their later child was "spare parts"....I would hope to be able to help them as they dealt with the severe chronic illness and how it affects the whole family, and hopefully with the recovery of both children from any procedures.
The thing, when considering these type of actions take place is, we cannot assume that everyone is as ethical or loving or moral as we are. It may not change the choices we make, but we need to be aware of the "can of worms" or the "slippery slope" our actions may start...and be prepared with an appropriate answer for our decision that can hopefully stop that progression if necessary.
_____________________________
Live your life in such a way that when your feet hit the floor in the morning, Satan shudders and says, "Oh no, she's awake."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 2:52:32 PM
|
|
|
Sideways
Posts: 3368
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
I can definitely see the objection to creating 15 embryos and destroying the 13 that didn't match. I would consider getting pregnant again, but not at the expense of creating then destroying embryos.
In the Denmark case they examined eggs, not embryos, which is far less objectionable. I do understand the potential for abuse, but as with many situations, simply because there can be abuse does not mean that all cases are abusive.
_____________________________
Row, row, row your boat, gently down the stream. If you see a crocodile, don't forget to scream.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 3:00:32 PM
|
|
|
W.O.F.
Posts: 1653
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: an ignoble beginning
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Sideways
I can definitely see the objection to creating 15 embryos and destroying the 13 that didn't match. I would consider getting pregnant again, but not at the expense of creating then destroying embryos.
In the Denmark case they examined eggs, not embryos, which is far less objectionable. I do understand the potential for abuse, but as with many situations, simply because there can be abuse does not mean that all cases are abusive.
no..and I don't think anyone meant to imply that. I am sorry if I did imply that.
I just think we have to be aware of the dangers of these things and not assume that everyone has the same value of life that we do or don't....and while MOST parents would never think of destroying 13 children (embryos) in order to hopefully save one child....I don't know how much of an issue this would really be.
I just wonder what would happen if we worked more on cloning organs, etc that could be used in this circumstances? and by organs, I literally mean just the organs. I have seen on a documentary that they are successfully cloning skin and even livers for people from their own healthy cells.....so....if we can do that (assuming someone has enough healthy cells)...why aren't we doing more of it?
bone marrow is of course much more tricky and I don't think it would be able to be cloned disease free...but then I am not a bio-engineer either....
_____________________________
Live your life in such a way that when your feet hit the floor in the morning, Satan shudders and says, "Oh no, she's awake."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 3:19:09 PM
|
|
|
laura...
Posts: 3280
Joined: 3/1/2005
From: NE Ohio
Status: offline
|
quote:
bone marrow is of course much more tricky and I don't think it would be able to be cloned disease free...but then I am not a bio-engineer either....
Bone marrow is produced by the body. It isn't an organ. I know that bone marrow can be harvested from a leukemia patient while they are in remission, "washed" and then returned to the patient if/when needed.
_____________________________
This is what the Lord says: “Stop at the crossroads and look around. Ask for the old, godly way, and walk in it. Travel its path, and you will find rest for your souls. But you reply, ‘No, that’s not the road we want!’ Jer 6:16
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 3:41:20 PM
|
|
|
10SNE1?
Posts: 218
Joined: 4/19/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: StephK
After reading the book I think that if a child is a match and is old enough to have doubts about being the donor there should be a guardian ad litem provided who will put the "donor" child's best interest first since the parents aren't honestly able to do so.
It's a slippery slope to create people for spare parts.
So, just extrapolating from this and several other comments on this thread:
Should it be illegal to ever use a minor child ( or perhaps say, someone under the age of 15 or so...too young to really understand the risks) as a donor?
Say a parent has four-year old twins, should the parents have the "right" to decide that one twin will donate a kidney to the other? How about bone marrow which does carry risk"
Who decides that the parents "aren't honestly able" to put the child's best interest first? Just because a five year old isn't old enough to have "doubts" doesn't mean that she won't grow up to be an adult who must live with the consequences.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 3:58:13 PM
|
|
|
StephK
Posts: 2780
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Southwest Louisiana
Status: offline
|
It should be quite difficult to use another child for the medical care of another. They can't comprehend nor consent to these medical procedures which have risks of their own.
_____________________________
Stephanie
Envy is always referred to by its political alias, "social justice."
~ Thomas Sowell
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 5:02:03 PM
|
|
|
bolt.
Posts: 1759
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: Canada
Status: offline
|
I think the Bible is clear that all people should be willing to go so far as to give up their lives for another, and I see that most especially in reference to a brother or sister. Marrow donation (or other donation) is a part of living ethically in a family, even if it hurts. Just because a baby is too young to know right from wrong does not mean that their parents should be troubled by making the morally right decision on their behalf.
And I think most of you do think that small children must be taught and disciplined to do right as far as they are able, although perhaps you do not see that 'doing right' as a 'duty' of the child. My phrasing seems to be off.
In any case, the question asked was would 'I' do it, and I would give it a shot -- and I don't think I'm in any danger of discarding the child emotionally after their 'purpose' was fulfilled. Whether everyone should do it? Whether there is a danger in some cases? I don't know... there probably is risk there... But I don't think myself as a parent or any child in my home would fall into any of these traps, abuses or dysfunctions.
I would love the baby, and rejoice that he/she was able to have a ministry to a sibling so early. Then I would go on with parenting as usual.
In the case of continual need... If the child grew older and voiced objections, I would patiently explain that it was his/her godly duty to suffer this temporary pain on a regular basis in order to keep the sibling alive, and that it was not optional. If the objections surfaced as a teen, I would patiently explain the same things, but indicate that they were free to choose to skip the procedures and allow the disease to consume the sibling -- that I would still love them, but that I couldn't possibly approve of such an immoral choice, any more than I would approve of them standing on a lakeshore patiently watching a friend drown.
_____________________________
Are you having trouble getting your daily dose of the life changing Word of God?
Let my friend Brian at Daily Audio Bible help you too.
>>audio link<<
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 6:27:36 PM
|
|
|
OneOfHisJewels
Posts: 2626
Joined: 8/9/2007
From: out of the everywhere into here
Status: offline
|
Boy, that's putting a lot of pressure on a child!
Almost like when a dad pressures his son to be a star quarterback..
only 10 times worse!
I have young adult friend (18? I think)....when she was about 13? her older brother died of lukemia..they were a year apart in age, and very CLOSE..like best friends. The chemo didn't work, and his last hope was a bone marrow. This girl did it. BUT ..............her MOM did not PRESSURE her...she told her she would be a good match, asked if she would consider it, but did NOT force her. I admire her for what she did, but I also admire the mom for NOT forcing her. It's sad he died anyway, but that's not really the point of this thread.....
well, maybe it is.......
what if you conceive a child for the reasons talked about in this thread and the child dies anyway..
then do you blame the new child for not doing his/her job? 
And what if all the stuff the "extra" child goes through for the sick child, causes THAT child to then have chronic health problems......then do you have another baby for THAT kid.......this illustrates why it is such a slippery slope.
________________
p.s. That girl was not conceived for that reason..this boy and girl were already somewhere in the 9/10/11 age range (can't remember exactly) when he got sick.
< Message edited by OneOfHisJewels -- 6/25/2009 6:37:18 PM >
_____________________________
Wizard's rule #1 .People can be stupid and willfully deceived (that's from the book, not the show)..slightly edited for CW
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 6:32:41 PM
|
|
|
3cappuccinosmom
Posts: 3587
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
This girl did it. BUT ..............her MOM did not PRESSURE her...she told her she would be a good match, asked if she would consider it, but did NOT force her. I admire her for what she did, but I also admire the mom for NOT forcing her. It's sad he died anyway, but that's not really the point of this thread.....
But it is related. Outcomes are not guaranteed. In such a case, if a child were concieved for the purpose of being a donor match, that child was "made" to fill a specific need/desire, which he or she failed to fill when the sibling died anyway. And the more effort one went to in order to get a match (fertility treatments, genetic screening, egg screening, embryo screening, selective "reduction" and on down the line) the less value that child had apart from their ability to produce the donor material, and even less when they turn out to be a "failure" for whatever reason. 
_____________________________
 Moo
The Ballad of Bad Biruk
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 6:48:23 PM
|
|
|
bolt.
Posts: 1759
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: Canada
Status: offline
|
Being a star quarterback is not an ethical imperative. Saving a sibling's life (if it is within one's capacity) is a moral imperative. I believe all parents should pressure their children to behave in ethical ways, even if it hurts. At a younger age, yes, even 'force' the issue. At a later age, to explain the ethics clearly and then leave it in their hands.
(If my daughter were 13, I would frame it in terms of a free choice, but I would not pretend that I thought both choices were morally acceptable -- unless the risk was death on both sides.)
No, I don't think a 5 year old can save a drowning sibling. However, I do think a 5 year old can go through a donation process.
And, like it or not, if a person can take lifesaving action, at minor risk to them-self -- and yet (with plenty of time to make a premeditated choice) chooses not to take that action, they DO carry some blame for that death. That's why I would shelter a young child from that decision by making it for them. Older children (teens) would have to face the fall out of their immoral choice them-self.
... but we do agree, at least, about making a total hero out of a child with such a significant, painful, sacrificial and life giving ministry at a young age.
And:
If *I* conceived a child under these circumstances, and the hope did not work out, I would grieve the death of my older child, and go on with parenting my living children as best as I was able through my grief. Why would there be any question of blame?
_____________________________
Are you having trouble getting your daily dose of the life changing Word of God?
Let my friend Brian at Daily Audio Bible help you too.
>>audio link<<
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 6:55:20 PM
|
|
|
OneOfHisJewels
Posts: 2626
Joined: 8/9/2007
From: out of the everywhere into here
Status: offline
|
You know, kids who grow up thinking that they had to do too much raising of their younger siblings, and such similar things grow up resentful enough. I would imagine a child with THAT kind of pressure would grow up REALLY resentful.
quote:
Being a star quarterback is not an ethical imperative
What if the reason the dad wants that for a kid is because the family is poverty stricken, and the other son needs a kidney and they don't have insurance, so that's why the dad is pressuring the son, because he wants him to play pro ball, and get $ for the son's medical bills. That might be a good reason, but if the son being pressured hates football and is unncoordinated then it would be cruel........
and that's really the same reasoning you're using....you are justifying cruelty to one child for the sake of another child.
< Message edited by OneOfHisJewels -- 6/25/2009 7:01:37 PM >
_____________________________
Wizard's rule #1 .People can be stupid and willfully deceived (that's from the book, not the show)..slightly edited for CW
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 6:59:17 PM
|
|
|
bolt.
Posts: 1759
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: Canada
Status: offline
|
I would hope they would feel like a hero.
However, again -- helping your parents parent is not an ethical imperative, so parents are in the wrong for pressuring or forcing that, if it becomes extreme.
Whereas saving life (where possible) is a moral imperative, and a parent would be in the right for pressuring or forcing (depending on age) the child to do what is right.
_____________________________
Are you having trouble getting your daily dose of the life changing Word of God?
Let my friend Brian at Daily Audio Bible help you too.
>>audio link<<
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Conceiving one child to save another - 6/25/2009 7:01:46 PM
|
|
|
zoebob
Posts: 7962
Joined: 4/13/2005
From: land of limbo
Status: online
|
If I had a sibling that needed an organ transplant (and I did) and I was still a minor (I wasn't) and later found out that I may have been able to save his life but no one tried and then he died I would feel terrible. When my brother first went into kidney failure they tested all of us. None of us were a very good match and his situation wasn't dire yet so they did not do it because the dr did not want to "waste" a good kidney that wasn't a very good match (my other brother, my parents, and I were all like 50%) and have it fail anyway. However, if one of us had been a closer match they would have done it and I can't imagine having not done everything I could to save him.
I liken it to this...when a young child gets pregnant by rape/incest do we allow her to have an abortion to save her the pain just to save the baby's life or do we expect her to carry to term if at all possible even though it is painful and difficult.
_____________________________
L-R: DD1, Ellies DS2, DD2, Ellies DS1
L-R: Ellies DD1, Ellies DD2, DS, Ellies DS3
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
