Conjoined twins - ethical dilemna?

Question

After the accusations of medico-legal interferance in the sad case of conjoined twins in the Balkans the dilemna was that both twins would die if untreated, whereas if they were seperated surgically one might survive.
The Church was against surgery and the Doctors mostly for an operation, thinking it better to have one living child than two dead.
The devout parents seemed stunned by the ethical questions and put their faith in the church.
Sadly both children died.
Who, if anyone was right?

Answer 1

so, basically, the church wanted to do nothing and condemn them both to death

how can that possibly be right???

a 2000 year old book of plagiarised myths has no place in policy-making in the 21st century

Answer 2

That's so sad. I heard about the twins but I never found out what happened to them. Personally, I think the doctors were right and though I have a lot of respect for the faith those parents put in the church, I think they were mis-guided. Even religious leaders are only humans in the end. The question is, why was the church against the operation?

Answer 3

As much as it seems unfortunate to me when religiosity rules out reason, it is vital for such decisions to be made by parents. And, then, their decisions should be respected impeccably. The graver danger than individual so-called "wrong" decisions is the imposition of a Church or society's universal mandates on everyone. Only by emphasizing the family's and patient's rights in bioethical decisions can we begin to move away from Church's and doctor's and social engineers thinking for a moment that such decisions are theirs. That has been the big advance in these bioethical decision / patient rights issues this past decade, the redirection of these decisions back onto families and patients. Hopefully, in time, Churches will have less dogmatic affect on areas better left to reason.

Answer 4

In my opinion, this one has no 'right' answer except the twins. I would lean towards the doctors, personally - but what if the twins ud rather die together than only have 1 live? Family bonds are what counts.

Answer 5

WE got to try and save at least one baby , for the parents sake more than anything . Have you any idea ,what its like to lose babies in these circumstances.? I speak from experiance , [in 1968 ] i lost twin conjoined girls.Technology has advanced so much since then.Wish, my babies had been given a chance.My heart goes out to the parents, and i hope their grief lessens in time. xx patty uk

Answer 6

The doctors were right to try to save at least one life, choosing which life to save would have been obvious, but still been difficult from a moralistic (as opposed to moral) point of view. As it turned out, the Church could say "I told you so" but at least the doctors tried. I'm sure in less enlightened times, both twins would have been put to death.

Answer 7

The parents are at fault.
Just goes to show you that the church does not care what happens to you or what you think. Just do as you are told.
Wake up!!!Make your own choices in the world or be a slave ...

Answer 8

If the parents believe it to be the will of God, it might have been the right decision for them.

Wasn't this case also controversal for the Doctors not seeking experienced help, and possibly saving both if they had? Or was that another case?

Answer 9

i can not see why the curch as to get involved

it is surely up to the parents with the support from the doctors


best wishes to the family through this hard time


xxx vici

Answer 10

if they were my twins...i would have opted for surgery to give some quality of life to one of the children. as usual - the church has TOO much to say!!