1) I think it isn't in the least bit immoral to transplant the organs of an anencephalic infant. As the prompt itself said, organ donation is one of the only ways to bring about a "silver lining" in such a sad, unfortunate situation. Why not aide an infant who still would have an opportunity at a full, successful life when given the chance? 2) I think it would be beneficial for a policy to be adapted that would legalize the harvesting of organs of anencephalic newborn with parental consent. This practice is really no different than typical adult organ donation, and should be carried out with the same regulations. 3) I do not agree that the resuscitation of a stillborn anencephalic infant in order to transplant organs is moral, simply because that is disrespectful to the parents, as well as the right to life and peaceful death of the infant itself. 4) I believe it would be justifiable to harvest the organs of a person in a vegetative state, with proper consent from the responsible party (such as next of kin). Again, this is a good way to make the best of a horrible situation, and if there is no sign of a recovery in the future, it is best to try to use the still functional organs of the patients to aid those who need them.
I do not think that it is disrespectful, unfair, or immoral to transplant the organs of an anencephalic infant as long as the parent consents to doing so. There is such a high need for organs that one of these infants has the possibility to save more than one life. This may as Chelsea said, bring some comfort to the parents in the tragic situation. The baby is not likely at all to live, and even though there is not whole brain death when the organs are removed, it is extremely unlikely that a baby would recover from that point. Yes, I think that a social policy that would permit the harvesting of organs from the infants should be adopted. It would most likely save many lives and brings a slight amount of happiness to parents who agree to it. I think that if the infant is stillborn, the parents should have the option as to whether they are alright with the doctors attempting resuscitation for the purpose of keeping the organs intact. Yes, I also think that it is justifiable to harvest the organs of a person in a vegetative state as long as there is consent from the one whom the person in the vegetative state designated. Again, many lives could be save with these organs, and it is not harming the person who will not recover.
I agree with the others, I don't think there is anything morally wrong with transplanting the organs of an anencephalic infant. The advantages of doing so are obvious, and the only thing that may be considered immoral is that the infant has no say in the situation, but it's not like we can just ask the baby if he or she is an organ donor. The baby has no opinion on the situation, so if the baby has no chance of survival, the decision should go in the hands of the parents. I think we should adopt a social policy that would permit (with parental consent) harvesting the organs of an anencephalic infant, and frankly, I'm suprised we haven't already. If parents are aloud to kill a baby while it's still in the womb that would have otherwise lived a full life, why can't they force a slightly early death to a baby who is about to die? I also think it is justifiable to attempt resuscitation of a stillborn baby to keep organs intact until they can be harvested. Again, this must be with the parents' consent. However, I don't think the doctors should ask the parents if they would allow this to be done in this situation. This could be considered disrespectful or appalling to the parents. I do not, however, think it is morally justifiable to harvest the organs of someone in a permanent vegetative state. This would only be permissible if that person expressed their thoughts on the situation before they were put in a vegetative state. This may also be permissible after the family has already decided to discontinue life support for the individual. In this case, the individual in the vegetative state will be dying anyway, so there is no reason not to harvest their organs. However, all of this can only be done if that person is an organ donor. Because we have an organ donor system that allows individuals to choose whether or not they want to donate organs, this person should've had the chance to do so during his/her life. If the person is not an organ donor, they probably wouldn't agree to harvesting organs while he/she is in a vegetative state.
1) I think it isn't in the least bit immoral to transplant the organs of an anencephalic infant. As the prompt itself said, organ donation is one of the only ways to bring about a "silver lining" in such a sad, unfortunate situation. Why not aide an infant who still would have an opportunity at a full, successful life when given the chance?
ReplyDelete2) I think it would be beneficial for a policy to be adapted that would legalize the harvesting of organs of anencephalic newborn with parental consent. This practice is really no different than typical adult organ donation, and should be carried out with the same regulations.
3) I do not agree that the resuscitation of a stillborn anencephalic infant in order to transplant organs is moral, simply because that is disrespectful to the parents, as well as the right to life and peaceful death of the infant itself.
4) I believe it would be justifiable to harvest the organs of a person in a vegetative state, with proper consent from the responsible party (such as next of kin). Again, this is a good way to make the best of a horrible situation, and if there is no sign of a recovery in the future, it is best to try to use the still functional organs of the patients to aid those who need them.
I do not think that it is disrespectful, unfair, or immoral to transplant the organs of an anencephalic infant as long as the parent consents to doing so. There is such a high need for organs that one of these infants has the possibility to save more than one life. This may as Chelsea said, bring some comfort to the parents in the tragic situation. The baby is not likely at all to live, and even though there is not whole brain death when the organs are removed, it is extremely unlikely that a baby would recover from that point. Yes, I think that a social policy that would permit the harvesting of organs from the infants should be adopted. It would most likely save many lives and brings a slight amount of happiness to parents who agree to it. I think that if the infant is stillborn, the parents should have the option as to whether they are alright with the doctors attempting resuscitation for the purpose of keeping the organs intact. Yes, I also think that it is justifiable to harvest the organs of a person in a vegetative state as long as there is consent from the one whom the person in the vegetative state designated. Again, many lives could be save with these organs, and it is not harming the person who will not recover.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the others, I don't think there is anything morally wrong with transplanting the organs of an anencephalic infant. The advantages of doing so are obvious, and the only thing that may be considered immoral is that the infant has no say in the situation, but it's not like we can just ask the baby if he or she is an organ donor. The baby has no opinion on the situation, so if the baby has no chance of survival, the decision should go in the hands of the parents. I think we should adopt a social policy that would permit (with parental consent) harvesting the organs of an anencephalic infant, and frankly, I'm suprised we haven't already. If parents are aloud to kill a baby while it's still in the womb that would have otherwise lived a full life, why can't they force a slightly early death to a baby who is about to die? I also think it is justifiable to attempt resuscitation of a stillborn baby to keep organs intact until they can be harvested. Again, this must be with the parents' consent. However, I don't think the doctors should ask the parents if they would allow this to be done in this situation. This could be considered disrespectful or appalling to the parents. I do not, however, think it is morally justifiable to harvest the organs of someone in a permanent vegetative state. This would only be permissible if that person expressed their thoughts on the situation before they were put in a vegetative state. This may also be permissible after the family has already decided to discontinue life support for the individual. In this case, the individual in the vegetative state will be dying anyway, so there is no reason not to harvest their organs. However, all of this can only be done if that person is an organ donor. Because we have an organ donor system that allows individuals to choose whether or not they want to donate organs, this person should've had the chance to do so during his/her life. If the person is not an organ donor, they probably wouldn't agree to harvesting organs while he/she is in a vegetative state.
ReplyDelete