Would you keep that child alive through artificial means? Would your age or the age of the child have a bearing on your decision?
2007-12-29 09:43:46 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Polls & Surveys
Whoa... I had been seeing all of your silly, playful questions... And then you ask... This.
This is tough. I am a father of 2 gorgeous, intelligent, sweet little girls...
To answer responsibly, I would like to say that I would pull the plug and allow her organs, veins and anything else to be harvested so that other people could have a better chance at life... I think it would be a great way of honoring her memory.
Te answer realistically... I would need help to do that. I would be really tempted to be selfish and keep her around as long as I could. It is difficult for me to imagine a world without my daughters in it...
That would be extraordinarily hard.
2007-12-29 14:36:55 · answer #1 · answered by Geaux Ghoti 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Braindead is dead! No need for keeping the body breathing. Not like a deep coma, where there is hope, no matter how remote. Braindead is the clinical definition for death in the first place! Morality does not come into play here. This child is already gone.
2007-12-29 09:59:43 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, I wouldn't keep the child alive. Just as I wouldn't expect my family to keep me alive artificially if I was braindead. What would be the point? "Braindead" means the person has no awareness of anything, so let him/her go. Donate the child's organs to another child who needs them, so the child will live on in someone else' life.
2007-12-29 09:49:55 · answer #3 · answered by kathi1vee 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
below those circumstances in spite of the youngster's age i could ask for the gadget to be became off.i could enable him/ her bypass with a sprint dignity .there's no high quality of existence purely being falsely saved alive.ok some could say if the youngster is ideas lifeless it does not understand any diverse besides.yet i could no longer try this to a new child ,fake existence is worse than loss of existence as there's no closure ,the mummy and dad grieve for a new child they can't bury so why no longer enable them to bypass in peace and grieve remarkable or perhaps although in no way overlook the youngster yet flow on with their lives.
2016-11-26 01:59:48 · answer #4 · answered by Erika 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why would anyone try to keep a braindead child or human alive? Are we Mad Scientists?! Let nature play it's role. Only the Strong Survive.....
2007-12-29 09:49:32 · answer #5 · answered by Buzz Litebeer 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I had to deal with this with an adult family member that went brain dead because of liver disease and would and could do it with a child if faced with it. God help anyone that has life and death decisions dumped in their lap, I still have bad dreams
2007-12-29 10:03:54 · answer #6 · answered by ? 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
my age or the childs would have no bearing on it
a life is a life no matter the means in that situation!
2007-12-29 10:03:28 · answer #7 · answered by Judas Rusty 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't believe in keeping ANYONE alive artificially, whether they are brain dead or not, age 5 or 105.
If something happens to someone causing them to be unable to keep themselves alive, IT IS THEIR TIME TO DIE.
2007-12-29 10:10:45 · answer #8 · answered by Barney Blake 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I've already had to make that decision, over 20 years ago. That is not living, that is existing. Return them to the Lord.
2007-12-29 09:50:33 · answer #9 · answered by Deborah S 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
No, I would not want to put my child through that. Why make someone suffer any more than they are already suffering. =O
2007-12-29 10:01:31 · answer #10 · answered by spiritcavegrl 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋