h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

THere has been a problem that has been hanging around the back of my mind. It's one of those "moral" things, and I was born with an absence of scruples and a natural lack of moral fibre, so I find it difficult.
Here's the question:

A couple of years ago there were a pair of siamese twins born. One of them was incredibly ill, and so they were both in pain. I don't know the exact medical details, but the ill twin was somehow "taking life" from the moderately healthy twin. In a couple of days, if left to themselves, both twins would die. However, there was an operation they could do that would seperate the twins, resulting in the definite death of the ill one, but giving the healthy one quite a good chance of survival.

What would YOU do?


P.S. Tell everyone you know about this thread, please.

Traveller in Time finally, with a sad answer
"I would cry.

And , the mother and children.

together.

some more. . .

Be happy for the chances of one reasonable healthy baby.







Basically, I do not want this to happen to anybody. "

Yay! Someone actually replied! Maybe I would get more replies if I found a way to put this on the "Deep Thought" section.

It is a very sad case, and the saddest thing is that it actually happened a couple of years ago, and it has happened several times before that. However, I am afraid I cannot remember whether they decided that having the operation would be morally correct.

Traveller in Time packing
"Try < <./>Askh2g2</.> > there will be many more replies. "

Thanks! I've started a thread there, that links to here, so keep posting and hope others arrive.

I have arrived. I'd certainly say that it was morally wrong to allow one twin to die when there was a good chance of saving it.

Is this case you're thinking of the 'Jodie and Mary' case?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/920487.stm

Each case must be judged on it's individual circumstances. In a situation where boths lives are at risk without seperation and there is a reasonable chance of one twin surving after speration then, yes, the other twin should be seperated and allowed to pass away.

Am I glad I'm not the judge.

If one child is 'draining the life' from the other is that murder?

Peter

I don't see the "draining the life" thing as murder, as this is in NO way deliberate, and we are talking about babies just a couple of days old. However, I get the point and it is a very interesting one. Some of the people opposed to the operation were saying that both lives, since the babies were believed both to have properly functioning minds, are equally valuable.

However, if both are equally valuable, then sacrificing 80 years of one for a couple of days of the other does not sound very equal to me.

P.S. Thanks Otto, I'm pretty sure that is the case I'm thinking of.

Your post 10 does seem to sum up what I think most people think. I think I agree, but, as someone else said previously, I'm glad I wasn't the judge in this case.

TRiG.