Accountability is one of the questions that the passage sends to the readers.

Should the law be

blamed, or should healthcare workers be held accountable because they are the ones who make
the final decision? Other people would say that Florida should be held accountable for hindering
the benefit of other children, mainly because they argue that the child will die anyway, and
others could have benefited. The argument often relies upon practical approaches and defends
parents’ decision to donate their dying child’s organs by arguing for the greater good. It is like
the trolley dilemma that you will kill one person to save five people. If her organs are donated to
other children, she can save them and prolong their lives, and we know that there is no chance
for Baby Theresa to live longer, we can say it is ethically correct. On the other hand, other
people would say that it is murder, but you can’t do anything in anencephaly syndrome. Baby
Theresa was incapable of having ideas, feelings, or valuable experiences. Therefore, Baby
Theresa would not gain from a longer life. As a result, taking her own life would not be harmful
to her. The last main argument is that no one can hold parents to restrict what they want to do
with their child because, in a sense, they own the child, but if there is a law that states otherwise,
there is no other choice, right? But if the law is not included, it is for the parents to decide. If
they want to donate the organs, then other people don't have the right to the parent’s decision. It
seems even against the culture of where they are, they are the ones who will decide what will
happen to the child.