If a man could lay down his life for only one of the following, who should it be: his wife or his child?

Answer 1

His child thats who has to carry his name and bloodline on.

Answer 2

The man should lay down his life for his wife, who should, in turn, lay down her life for her child. The man protects the family; the wife protects and nurtures the child. If the man succeeds in protecting the wife, she will have a better chance of protecting the child in turn. This strategy gives the child a double wall of protection, and lowers the possibility that the two protectors will perish together at once protecting the child, thus leaving the child completely at the enemy's mercy should they both fall at the same time.

Answer 3

His child. Between a husband and wife there is a bond. However, it's just the regular old kind of love, and much of the time it doesn't even last. Think about the number of divorces there are. But between a parent and a child is a powerful thing--unconditional love. You love your kids no matter what happens. You should put them before anyone else. Also, from the wife's point of view, I would be horrified and guilty if my husband ever chose to save me over our children.

Answer 4

Paternally speaking, the child because we have a built in instinct to protect our young and make sure they survive to pass on our genetics.
Culturally speaking, the child because thats what society would want you to do..
Morally and logically speaking, you would suffer a moral dilemma and refuse to choose between them, attempt to save both or die trying...
Emotionally speaking, well seriously I dont know it would be up to the person in that situation only. Nobody can make that kind of decision until they are faced with it. Also everyones circumstances are unique.. for example, if your child was a mass murderer, or completely brain dead or something like that but the wife was healthy and good.. or vice versa, then that might influence the outcome.

PS I read your question to mean that the husband would die saving either his wife or child and that only the one he gave his life for would live.. leaving only one survivor. If you meant he would also survive then logically speaking he would save the wife so they could continue to produce more offspring and preserve their genetics, but emotionally speaking he would choose to save his child because his wife would want him to, and their marriage would not likely endure such a tragedy as the loss of their child.

Answer 5

Horrible situation that, unfortunately, happened to many people (for example, in the Holocaust, when some Jewish people had a chance to save a child, sometimes, by giving them to Christian neighbors, but not to save themselves).

God forbid one had to make the change, but if it's either/or saving the child has more of a chance of perpetuating life into the future. But nobody should ever have to make that kind of a choice.

Answer 6

very tough question! i hope my future husband will not have to face this. I think the man, wife and the doctor should talk about what's the best given this situation. :o) If there's no other choice, the child should live.

Answer 7

The right answer is to find another way. But if you absolutely have to choose, it is the child. You can easily fall in love again, but the mother of the child will NEVER cope with a loss of a child that easily.

Answer 8

Hard question but the child. But I know someone that told me the wife because they could always have more kids. so its your call

Answer 9

i would go with the child. if the wife was any kind of a mother, she would want that for her child as well.

Answer 10

I would rather lay down my life to my child, for sure, that would be what my husband would wanted to do with me instead of choosing him.

Answer 11

I'm guessing the wife would agree it should be for the child.