Meaning, is it right for parents to create a "savior" child who would act as a donor (blood, tissue, organ, etc.) for its terminally ill sibling who may otherwise not find a suitable donor.
2006-12-13 23:20:13 · 8 answers · asked by BlytheLyssa 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I don't see why it would be wrong unless it's being done for other purpose than saving a life.
We all know that "prayers" and "faith" have never cured the ill. It is science and knowledge.
2006-12-14 03:01:16 · answer #1 · answered by Baphomet 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not if that was the only reason the child was created.To me it would be totally different if both children were already born and one gets sick,then the decision could be made if the other child would be a donor.I think if a child was conceived for the sole purpose of being a donor for the other child,it would make them feel as if they weren't really wanted,just conceived to cure the other child.And is it our right to conceive a child for donor purposes knowing that the child will more than likely have to go through some painful procedures to help the other child.I may feel differently if I was actually in that situation,but I would never want to sacrifice one childs well being and happiness for the sole purpose of saving another.
2006-12-14 01:33:43 · answer #2 · answered by stellablue1959 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I can't agree with this way of thinking.I think people should put more faith in God, and quite trying to make clones to save our lives. If its your time to die, it's your time to die. Spare parts or not. I think that trying to have another child so they could be a suitable donor for an ill sibling is just wrong.
2006-12-13 23:37:35 · answer #3 · answered by candib 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It can go either way - when you love someone enough you would do anything to help not see the suffer. It would be hard for the siblings - the pressure but on the other hand everything happens for a reason.
2006-12-13 23:34:12 · answer #4 · answered by R W 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How would you like to know that the "only " reason "'you" were conceived was for "spare parts"! I totally disagree with this concept and have done extensive reading on this subject. In almost ALL cases, the "second" child becomes "suicidal" and the "ill" child dies anyway. If you are considering doing this, STOP NOW, do not put this "burden" on an innocent victim. If I had my way, if I were in POWER, I would "ban" all of this! Science is going "way too far", in building hopes and dreams in parents with this concept. It is healthy for any of you. Don't do it.Have you children because you want them and love them, not for Spare Parts!!!
2006-12-13 23:29:52 · answer #5 · answered by peaches 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Yes
2006-12-13 23:31:23 · answer #6 · answered by mimi 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the question raises many issues on ethics and morals.
we could go all the way back to birth control pills and test tube babies. the question of "Are we playing God?" I believe science is part of God because of the fact that we were born with the brains to achieve these medical advancements.
2006-12-13 23:37:13 · answer #7 · answered by Enigma 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Okay if it is medically viable!
2006-12-13 23:23:46 · answer #8 · answered by Sami V 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋