What would you do, Babies with Anencephaly...

Also absent are any higher brain functions...

This was a topic of discussion in my philosophy class in college, and I felt it would provide a good lesson for apprentices...the jedi code protects life, how do we define life/living...does cognitive functions factor in...if we determine that consciousness is a necessity to being alive what then...of others can benefit from one sacrifice do we do it...is it really a sacrifice if there is no spark of life...

If it's the article i'm thinking of it is quite old as it has been 8 years since that class...

totjo forces https in order not to break our own https. Their site was down when i tried.

Obviously I missed the important issue, which is to donate a brainless body to other people. I guess you'd have to live in a jurisdiction where this is legal in order to do it. I don't know, this is so weird.

Obi-wan Kenobi wrote: Most of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view

I don't think there is a right or wrong answer here, it really is up to the individual to decide the motivations and consequences behind each choice. Kohadre said the option of keeping such a child alive only to be picked apart is "dark, morbid, deranged, and almost evil"; one of the recipients of such organs might entirely disagree.

I would personally suggest to my wife to terminate pregnancy, but if she decided to carry then I would support her as well. It is, after all, something that is much harder on the carrier (the woman) than it is on the man.

Magnus Staar wrote:

Obi-wan Kenobi wrote: Most of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view

I don't think there is a right or wrong answer here, it really is up to the individual to decide the motivations and consequences behind each choice. Kohadre said the option of keeping such a child alive only to be picked apart is "dark, morbid, deranged, and almost evil"; one of the recipients of such organs might entirely disagree.

I would personally suggest to my wife to terminate pregnancy, but if she decided to carry then I would support her as well. It is, after all, something that is much harder on the carrier (the woman) than it is on the man.

Hi Magnus,

I'm not arguing that there is not a necessity for donor organs in pediatric patients. There will always be more people in need of donor organs than there will ever be an adequate supply to match that need. I also agree that there is a great service done to those who receive live saving donor organs.

However,

The choice to carry a corpse to term, only for the purpose of chopping it up and shipping it's parts out still remains a very morbid choice to me. How is that any different from scientists and black market dealers who wish to grow human fetuses in test tubes, for the sole purpose of hacking them apart and then selling off their organs?

Kohadre wrote:

Magnus Staar wrote:

Obi-wan Kenobi wrote: Most of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view

I don't think there is a right or wrong answer here, it really is up to the individual to decide the motivations and consequences behind each choice. Kohadre said the option of keeping such a child alive only to be picked apart is "dark, morbid, deranged, and almost evil"; one of the recipients of such organs might entirely disagree.

I would personally suggest to my wife to terminate pregnancy, but if she decided to carry then I would support her as well. It is, after all, something that is much harder on the carrier (the woman) than it is on the man.

Hi Magnus,

I'm not arguing that there is not a necessity for donor organs in pediatric patients. There will always be more people in need of donor organs than there will ever be an adequate supply to match that need. I also agree that there is a great service done to those who receive live saving donor organs.

I was not trying to suggest your answer was wrong, far from it, I agree with you, as I would not carry such a baby to term. But I think that is only one point of view among many.

Kohadre wrote: The choice to carry a corpse to term, only for the purpose of chopping it up and shipping it's parts out still remains a very morbid choice to me. How is that any different from scientists and black market dealers who wish to grow human fetuses in test tubes, for the sole purpose of hacking them apart and then selling off their organs?

This is all my opinion, of course, but I feel that the sacrifice involved by the couple carrying the baby whose organs will be donated, makes it different from the typical capitalist resource exploitation model suggested by test tube organ harvesting.

Even though this may sound selfish, I'd put the health of the mother first. That said, it's ultimately the mother's decision.

If there's no danger to carry the baby to term and organ donation would be possible, then I think that's most definitely what my wife would do as I know her. But it must be absolutely heartbreaking to keep going knowing in advance that your own child will be stillborn. As a father, I'd wish nobody would have to ever be in that position.

Cyan Sarden wrote: Even though this may sound selfish, I'd put the health of the mother first. That said, it's ultimately the mother's decision.

It's not selfish, it's actually the reasonable, responsible mindset. Despite what the ultra-conservative religious right says...

Kohadre wrote: The choice to carry a corpse to term, only for the purpose of chopping it up and shipping it's parts out still remains a very morbid choice to me. How is that any different from scientists and black market dealers who wish to grow human fetuses in test tubes, for the sole purpose of hacking them apart and then selling off their organs?

The couple in question were given a choice: abort, and live with the pain of a lost child, or complete the pregnancy and mitigate the pain of loss by helping others live? I don't see how that is morbid. Is it any more morbid than keeping a brain-dead adult on life support for the purpose of organ donation?

Zenchi wrote: I explained in clear instructions how to make the link work....
The title has been edited, thank you...

I did that and it still does not work.

In any case I see no moral dilemma. The child is not viable and should be aborted.

Kohadre wrote: [How is that any different from scientists and black market dealers who wish to grow human fetuses in test tubes, for the sole purpose of hacking them apart and then selling off their organs?

There's a very fundamental difference here - the couple DIDN'T grow a fetus as an organ bank. They wanted to have a child. The child is lost - that's the reality, but if something good can come from that situation, why not pursue it? I truly fail to see how that should be considered morbid.