What is your response to this ethics and morality thought experiment?

Question

A woman awakes one morning and laying next to her in bed is an unconscious man, apparently comatose. There is also standing above her another man who explains that her bed companion is a famous, Nobel-prize winning author.

The standing, conscious fellow points out that during the night, the woman and the author were joined by several tubes, and that at this moment, her body is keeping the author alive via these tubes. He needs her to remain connected to these tubes for a total of 9 months, at which point the author will again be able to live on his own.

However, if she disconnects the tubes before the 9-month period, the author will immediately perish.

IS SHE ETHICALLY BOUND TO LEAVE THE TUBES ATTACHED FOR 9 MONTHS?
OR CAN SHE ETHICALLY JUSTIFY CHOOSING NOT TO DONATE HER BODY FOR THIS TASK, DISCONNECT THE TUBES, AND ALLOW THE AUTHOR TO DIE?

Please detail your ethical reasoning. (Please focus on her decision based on the situation she finds herself in.)

For those of you who are impressed with this question, I cannot claim it to be original. However, I also cannot remember where I heard it. I hope that the answering process is useful.

Answer 1

She is not ethically bound to do so. It was unethical in the first place for the burden of another's life to be put upon her without her prior consent.

Answer 2

If she gives a **** about the Nobel Prize or if she is a reader, then she might consider it but will probably be a little peeved at not having been asked for permission.

If she is illiterate or feels she doesn't need another Nobel Prize winning author, then she will jump up and leave...

So you are trying to analogize abortion huh?. Nobody knows what the future of the unborn will be...It might grow up to be a contributor to society and yet, the same exact person could grow up to be a social parasite...I don't think it is possible to guarantee a certain outcome unless you can guarantee every single living moment of the person...The Terminator movies were fun though.

Answer 3

on the outset it really is a hypothetical question. Hypothetical questions are literally not in and of themselves real looking. Secondarily as the different answerer has stated this has got here about out of the area of freedom of will. Ethics and morality might want to correctly be 2 distinct issues in this subject. Given the constrained quantity of information, there's an ethical crucial in contact and that is that of trading one life for yet another for a era of time. There are some questions which favor to be responded, yet first enable us seem on the opposite ethics in that of ways moral would that's for the laureate to allow this type of topic to take position. what kind of infringement are they putting upon the life of this human being. What earnings is he being deprived of and who will help his family contributors if one exists? Are the needs of the various better then the few (or one)? Say that the laureate has their accolades and what they have written reward the international already, is there extra they are going to make contributions? assume that the gentleman will be interrupted from making his personal contribution to the stunning reliable of society. Can others serve a similar purpose, are there no longer machines which may also avail? Frankly, your question is really a touch severe and ends up in extra questions then solutions. In my life I actually have had to in result "pull the plug" on my father and heavily respect human life in spite of age or actual subject.

Answer 4

I do not believe she is ethically bound to leave the tubes attached. Clearly her input and consent was not sought before this experiment began, so she is under no obligation to continue something that was forced upon her. The fact that he's a Nobel Prize winning author has very little to do with anything - this is a matter of her will and choice being subverted by other people who didn't care what she thought or how she felt about the situation. It's not something she volunteered for, or she wouldn't have awakened to find herself next to a comatose man needing the situation explained to her.

And yes, I believe that if a woman is a victim of rape or incest she has every right to chose to abort the fetus.

Blessed be!
)O(

Answer 5

No, she is not morally bound.

Unlike the case of abortion, something here is being done to actively preserve a life against nature, something that severely affects the woman's ability to live her life with any quality of living.

In the case of abortion, something must actively be done to cause the death, and allowing the pregnancy to come to term does not cause severe impact in a woman's ability to enjoy quality of living. I am not, of course, negating the discomfort and pains and expenses associated with pregnancy, only that they do not interfere with her ability to continue to hold meaningful employ and to pursue her leisure time as she sees fit, within only a few minor limits (if you take martial arts, hold off on full-contact sparing for a while, hm?).

In essence, it is the nature of action versus inaction, potential versus nonpotential. The nobel prize winner has lived out a great deal of his/her potential, and does not have the moral authority, coma or not, to remove quality of life from another. The child, on the otherhand, is pure potential and the mother has expended some of her potential (you can never recover those years you've already lived), and left to itself, nature will continue to develop the infant's potential.

Answer 6

LIke the virgin mary she was in effect raped or her body was violated.
Like the child mohammad forced to marry him at age 9 she was violated while unable to defend herself.
She is under no obligations to remain connected tohim and for her safety is obligated toremove the tubes.
What if it wasn't a famous author? Maybe a garbage collector, a farm labour, a theif, a serial killer , a nurse, or tatoo artis. Would not they be given the same considerations. Should she be allowed sentence a child molestor to death by removing the tubes, but forced to save another man because he was an author?
My personal beleif is that a woman is in charge of he rbody and it should be up to her and her along .

Answer 7

It strikes me as odd that the woman had *nothing* to do with that author coming to be there.

I realize it is possible for the author to appear through no fault of the woman, but it is a minority of the time.

I think the woman should take care of the author while she can and consider it an honor to do so. It is only nine months of her life, after all. Then she can let the author be taken care of by his fellow Nobel laureates once he is ready.

You are a metaphorical genius, Mr. Baritone. I salute you.

: )

.

Answer 8

If it is true and he will revive after say a year i see nothing wrong with life support, i think i know what youre insinuating, i see nothing wrong with abortion. however life support can be costly and if she cant afford it its not her fault the guy is in a coma(unless she drugged him or something) if she did put him in a coma then she must leave him connected because if he died it whould be on her head, if she had nothing to do with his comatose state it wasnt her fault nor her problem.

Answer 9

Will she be compensated for her time ?
After all this burden was not caused by choice.

As far as abortion, if a woman is raped, I think she has every right to abort. or incest, because of retardation.
If a woman accidentally gets preg, idk, it's her body, but she outta be more careful and not let it happen again.
If a woman gets preg all the time and constantly aborts, she should be made to have her tubes tied.

Answer 10

I think this is a silly question. If it was an actual situation, and not hypothetical, I would give it serious thought, but it's too far fetched!
EDIT:
Elphaba-
believe what you want, sweetheart. I think it's a very poor analogy. When a woman gets pregnant, she is responsible for her choice to have sex. The baby, um sorry, the "nobel prize winning author" shouldn't have to die for her poor choices. Why add murder to stupidity?

Answer 11

I'm tending to agree with Elphaba. Your questions are fantastic.

I'm all for a womans right to choose. Her body, her decision