You are on page 1of 2

Death is as natural part of life as is birth. It is our common ground.

However, we, human beings often have natural fear in dealing with it. Due to modern technological advancements, most especially in the medical field, we are now able to extend the life of people facing eminent death due to serious illnesses. I guess, the fast progression of our technology paves the road for the destruction of our morals and ethics. While others use it properly, some people abuse and misuse the technological breakthroughs of our time. Medicine aimed once at promoting health and prolonging human lives, deals nowadays with gene-techniques, euthanasia and cloning, abortion, which is the direct threat to human life. In the movie Sister‟s Keeper, Ana Fitzgerald was conceived as a surrogate of her sister Kate. Ana is genetically compatible in all ways with Kate so that she could donate blood, bone marrow, and organs to her sister to prolong her life. For me, Sara‟s and Brian‟s choice to conceive Ana to be a genetic match for Kate not morally justified. Perhaps more importantly, Sara and Brian deliberately created a child as a donor for their existing daughter, Kate. That act lead directly to Sara‟s mindset in which she considered her new child not as an individual but essentially as a form of treatment for Kate. According to Devolder (2005, p. 584), “…the standard employed is what would be acceptable if the donor child already existed. Umbilical cord blood harvest is widely accepted since it entails no physical intrusion. Bone marrow donations from young children to siblings are also widely accepted. Harvesting vital organs from children is not acceptable in view of the risks involved for the donor child.” In the movie, Sara is really desperate in saving Kate. She will do whatever it takes. However she didn‟t consider the decision of Kate that she is ready to die, that she accepted her fate, and that she doesn‟t want to receive any body part from her little sister and she also didn‟t consider the fact that Ana is also her daughter, that she also deserve to enjoy her life. Those in favor of this practice ascertain it is acceptable “as long as the parents intend to rear and love the donor child” (Wolf et al., 2003, p. 330). “The fact that these parents make so much effort to try to save their child suggests they are caring and loving parents and makes it very unlikely they will treat the new baby as a „bred to order child” (Devolder, 2005, p. 584). Another ethical dilemma that has yet to be thoroughly investigated is the psychological ramifications to the donor child knowing he or she had been selected for the purpose of saving a life. Other psychological factors include “whether the child‟s welfare is subordinated to that of the sick sibling, whether initial tissue donation is successful or further donations are required, and whether the sick child ultimately is cured or dies” (Knoppers et al., 2006, p. 212-213). Because PGD involves the process of picking viable embryos and discarding unacceptable embryos, the question of abortion is ultimately raised in whether or not it is anacceptable procedure. According to Knoppers et al. (2006, p. 203), two main points of view are debated. They are: (a) the embryo is a new human life entitled to full moral status from the time of fertilization, because from that time it holds the potential to develop into a complete human being, or

emory.ac. They all accepted it." REFERECES:    http://archie.des. The second objection pertains to the act of “selecting” an embryo. but to a lesser extent than a born human being. and gradually acquires “full” moral status during development. 330) asserts that “creating and discarding healthy embryos for lack of HLAcompatibility with the affected sibling is consistent with currently accepted embryo practices”.kumc.qub.pdf . These people oppose the selection and discarding of embryos as a whole. Some people feel this process is unnatural and produces a “manufactured good”.pdf http://www. p. moved on with their lives and every year on Kate's birthday they go to Montana. They went on with life. which was her "most favorite place in the world. 2082).pdf?sequence=1 http://www.(b) the embryo has some moral status from fertilization. Hashiloni-Dolev and Shkedi (2007) believe there are three main objectionable moral issues concerning PGD. It is a good thing that in the movie Sara realized her mistakes and accepted Kate‟s fate. Wolf et al. once again. The third objection deals with the future rights of the unborn child and how all children.uk/methics/CafferyR2008. should “always be treated as an end in itself and never merely as a means” (p.edu/bitstream/handle/2271/746/STTFasbender. The first is from those people who think embryos are people and should have human rights at the earliest point of conception. (2003.edu/mfp/302/302HeylerBookReview.