Question

Prompt #1 About one baby out of every 600 born in the U.S. has Down’s syndrome. Many of these children are born with fatal physical conditions that can cause quite a bit of pain and suffering. For instance, a baby with Down’s syndrome could be born with part of their vital organs missing, intestines might be blocked, and their heart might not pump properly. Surgery is often required for these infants to survive beyond the first few days of life.

Parents must decide whether to allow surgery to save the child, who may end up requiring costly long-term care and services for life or withholding permission thus causing the child to die.

*Is it immoral for the parents to withhold surgery?

*Likewise, is it immoral for the parents to allow the surgery?

*Is the assumption that parents will act in the best interest of their child justified?

*Morally speaking, would the physician deciding not to operate be tantamount to murder?

*Ethicist James Rachels (1975) uses the Baby Does case to illustrate how passive euthanasia can sometimes cause more suffering than active euthanasia. If it is morally permissible for parents to allow their infants to die, should active euthanasia be used instead?

*Considering the moral issues related to quality and sanctity of life, the principle of do no harm, and palliative care, are there ever any cases when euthanasia of an infant is morally justified? (USLOs 8.1, 8.3)

Answer 1

1. So basically if we talk about the income or capability of parents that if they afford the charges of treatment and also further life time care expensive then it will be immoral if parents denied for the surgery, because it depend on the condition of child that how the body will respond after surgery, it may respond in positive or in negative as well. But if parents are not capable to bear all the expensive then they are helpless and they should deny for surgery because in further treatment required by patient and if they don’t get the same severe condition arises. So this is not to be considered in immoral or inhuman category.

2. Again if we take the conclusion from above answer then it only depends on the parents pocket that how much money does their pocket allows. If they have then they should go for surgery if they don’t have then they don’t go. And if somehow parents allow the surgery by arranging expensive from elsewhere so this is also not counted in inhuman because every parent put efforts endlessly to save their child.

3. After long conversation with doctors it completely depends on parent to take best decision for their child, things only supposed to disrupt when it comes on the expenses of hospital, treatments, medicines and many more. Whatever the decision take by parents somehow they are also in believe that our decision save the life our child so they take the best decision according to situation and considering the health of their child.

4. No, it is not considered under murder because doctor knows the best about patient and conditions of patient when to operate or when not. If doctor feels like he or she should not operate the patient then there must be some complications which he or she explains the attendant of the patient.