What would you do in this situation? Save a childs life even if it cost u your arms and leggs?

Question

here is the situation...you are driving in the freeway when it starts raining heavily...there is an accident
what happens next A or B

A.) you walk out of the accident with minor scratches...and the 7 yr old boy in the car next to you dies...u dont know him and he is of no relation to you

B.)The 7 yr old survives the accident but it turns out that in this scenario...you find your self ending up with no arms or leggs

Would you change your life drastically for a stranger?..even if its a child?
i know that if it was someone we knew wed be quick to say yes ill do it,,but what if it was a stranger

Think about how ur life would be different...never walk again or hold anything.never drive ..i mean you could always install fake arms and legs but mentally would u be happy,,,would it be worth saving the 7 yr old boy that u dony know....but imagine how greatful it u would be if it was your 7 yr old boy or girl and the stranger saved ur childs life

Answer 1

Great questions. I would like to think that I would save the child, but my gut tells me I wouldn't.

Answer 2

No, I wouldn't make that big of a sacrifice.

A more interesting scenario is the following: A person lives a modestly nice life in a first world country, able to afford all sorts of things which are really luxuries. One day he or she learns that UNICEF estimates that "[f]or as little as $20-30, a child can be protected from Vitamin A deficiency and a host of deadly diseases, including diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, polio, measles, childhood tuberculosis, hepatitis B, and Hib (Haemophilus influenzae type b), which is a major cause of pneumonia and meningitis." and "A quarter of the children born every year – about 34 million infants – are still not protected against diseases for which inexpensive vaccines are available. Measles alone claimed over 770,000 lives in 2001 because children were not immunized with a vaccine costing less than $1 per dose." This person can now cut back a little bit on their luxuries. They don't have to do anything dramatic, like having to live in a cardboard box, just maybe going out to dinner a couple less times a month, or not buying that big screen TV, and the money they would have spent can instead save lives. Does this person do so? What would you do in this situation? Save a child's life even if it means eating out one time less?

It is all too easy to talk about big sacrificies in hypothetical situations. Why don't we talk about small sacrifices in real situations?

P.S. I hope that every person that volunteered to lose their limbs to save a child will look at the site below. If you are willing to lose your limbs to save one life, making a large donation would cost you less and save a lot more lives.

Answer 3

I like to believe there is no pre-determined outcome if one is willing to accept their fate at the moment of choice.
It would happen so fast that you would likely not have time to admire the appendages that so ruely hang from your body, have they ever done anything so grand as to save a life?
If that were my child and a stranger did this for me unknowingly, I would be forever in their debt.
I can not think of a greater sacrifice than to risk ones life for another, and it is, by the way, the only reason we are here. Someone, a stranger, gave his life, to make sure you had a country or a home or a car to even be in.

Answer 4

After the accident was over, I would feel sorry for the kid, but before it happened, I first of all dont see how I'd know there's a 7 year old kid in the car, and I would be looking out for myself and I would do anything possible to keep myself and any passengers safe. I'm going to say A), because of natural reactions and the fact that before you hit a car, you don't (usually) know who's in it. But yes, I would feel extremely bad after finding out a 7 year old boy was dead.

Answer 5

Interesting question. You've gotten many thought-provoking answers. It'll be a hard choice for you to choose a best answer.

Let me try a different tack. If I had perfect foresight, I'm not sure which I would choose. Luckily, your question is a flawed indicator of character because no one ever acts on perfect foresight. This question places us into the false position of choosing between absolute selfishness (at the destruction of another life) and absolute selflessness (at the destruction of your own life). I fear that people actually apply this thinking to real life - that you somehow must make a choice to destroy yourself to help others.

A real choice is always to attempt to save both yourself and the boy. In hindsight, this may not have actually been possible. My point though is that real human interaction usually consists of mutually beneficial actions.

Answer 6

I don't know what I would do right now. I would know when and if the time comes.

What I do know right now is that you are a sick individual. This is a horrific question. Anyone who answers with a definate yes or no without having actually experienced it has no idea what they are talking about.

I hope none of you have to learn this about yourselves. Sacrifice or even violence to protect. These things rarely thought about or sometimes thought possible for some people. Yet turns out to be the case when tragedy occurs. I really hope none of you have to go through this.

Speculation is sick.

Answer 7

I wouldn't choose. I would leave it to chance, as is far more likely to happen. Generally in a situation like that you aren't aware of the consequences, and if i saw the car coming I would try and save the child in complete ignorance of what might happen to me. Either I would live or die, thats about as far as I would think.
In a situation where I knew that I would lose something, then it might be different, though if i saw the child in distress alas I would do the stupid thing and dive in.

In any case, I value my mind more then my limbs, and am fairly sure that I would eventually be able to get cyberised to some extent :)

Answer 8

I would choose B for sure and if there was a C answer that was death I would choose it. Ive lived 30 years had some great times and that kid would never get to enjoy the things I did already. Just think if all people thought like most of these answers who would be the firemen,police,military? Selfish & greed will end this world.

Answer 9

yes, I would do it. I have children myself and I would hate to be without my children. My first reaction would be to save the life. I think of all the pain caused it I could have done something and didn't. I would forever see the look on the face of that child. I would absolutely do it, and I would not think twice. Children are innocent, they deserve every possible chance for a good life. I hate tho hear about children who only lived for a short while. To hear that their lives were cut short for no reason of their own.

Whoa.......I gotta stay in control I almost turned this into a Susan Smith conversation....God I hate her!!!!

Answer 10

It would depend, every situation has more than one variable. Our natural instincts tell us to do things or not do things in a split second while reasoning out the different senarios. I would have to say right now in my life, I would probably give my arms and legs to save an innocent child. However, if I were a mom with small infants and had them to take care of and look out for, I would be thinking of my children more and it wouldn't be easy to grow up with a care giver that couldn't get around very well or do things with you. I would probably say wouldn't save the child.

Answer 11

Smart question... but oftentimes situation we face is open-ended, not "A or B" type. For example, you can stop your car near the side of the road then call police or ambulance. But the most important thing is how you act reflects what is in your heart. If you are person of compassion, anyhow you will help the boy. If you are a selfish creature, you will ignore him.