Ethics/Theory Question

Doppelganger said:
Lets say you are in a car accident. You wake up in the hospital, and the person you were in the accident with (lets say from another car) is stitched up with you. Siamese twin style. The doctors made a quick decision to save this mans life and rerouted some of your arteries and blood vessels and kidneys to help him live. (I know this is unrealistic, merely theoretical, just go with me on this).

Basically his heart is all fucked up and they need to borrow some of your own blood and heart pumping and bodily functions to help this guy. If they disconnect the two of you, you'll live and be fine, but he'll die. They need a few months until they can help repair his heart and find new organs.

So the question is:

Is this unethical?
Should you have the right to separate from this man if you want, knowing he'll die, but if you just tough it out for a few months he'll be ok?

Does this situation change if you were the one that caused the accident? What about if he was the one that caused the accident?

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Yes you should have the right to separate, you didn't give permission to get stitched together in the first place. I don't like that the ethical onus is placed on the person who had no choice in the matter and didn't give consent to being used this way.

No matter who caused the accident the hospital doesn't have the right to make the decision to twin you up.
 
christiefan915 said:
If you're talking to me, yes I am. I chose to check that box on the driver's license.
Click to expand...
was actually asking the OP, but thanks for answering as well.

christiefan915 said:
Oh, and please don't offer some scenario on how the hospital will let me die so someone can get my organs.
Click to expand...
wasn't going there, but it's plausible that a legal argument could be made for temporary use of organs in such a manner. an extremely remote plausibility, obviously.
 
christiefan915 said:
If you're talking to me, yes I am. I chose to check that box on the driver's license.

Oh, and please don't offer some scenario on how the hospital will let me die so someone can get my organs.
Click to expand...

that's my argument. I'm not an organ donor for this exact reason. I don't care what they say, if a doctor is trying to save my life and they know in the back of their mind that if I die they might be able to save 5 people, that could influence them subconsciously.
 
Sardonic said:
It was unethical for them to stitch you together in the first place. I, personally, would let the poor person stay connected until they recovered. I would feel even more obligated to do so if I had caused the accident.

I would expect my care to be free because the hospital did not seek my permission to attach the other person to my person for their survival.
Click to expand...

You sound like a Christian.
 
Doppelganger said:
should you have a right to disconnect if you desired? or should such a situation not be allowed ?
Click to expand...

It's extremely clear what point you and Fox News is and has been trying to make here;

SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST NOW APPLIES TO HUMANS

That's the Libertarian anthem isn't it? Why should I pay for your education? Why should I pay for your roads? Why should I pay for your government? Because Libertarians never use parks, bridges, roads, public education, city state or federal government..............................

The tag line the Libertarian/Tea Baggers love is 'EVERYONE WANTS A FREE TICKET'.

If they saw our Constitution they would see we believe in Taxtation. It's simply part of America. The fact that Libertarian and Tea Party states pay less in taxation than what they spend is a bonus to my argument.
 
Doppelganger said:
that's my argument. I'm not an organ donor for this exact reason. I don't care what they say, if a doctor is trying to save my life and they know in the back of their mind that if I die they might be able to save 5 people, that could influence them subconsciously.
Click to expand...

So you have the ability to think that deep but can't figure out the corruption of Citizens United?

It's clear now you have no ability to think beyond yourself.
 
Anti-Party said:
It's extremely clear what point you and Fox News is and has been trying to make here;

SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST NOW APPLIES TO HUMANS

That's the Libertarian anthem isn't it? Why should I pay for your education? Why should I pay for your roads? Why should I pay for your government? Because Libertarians never use parks, bridges, roads, public education, city state or federal government..............................

The tag line the Libertarian/Tea Baggers love is 'EVERYONE WANTS A FREE TICKET'.

If they saw our Constitution they would see we believe in Taxtation. It's simply part of America. The fact that Libertarian and Tea Party states pay less in taxation than what they spend is a bonus to my argument.
Click to expand...

lol.. tell you what, i'll throw you a bone. you can tax me for roads, parks, public gardens, and enjoy the 5 dollars a year it costs out of my pocket. that's not where the bloat is.
 
Anti-Party said:
SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST NOW APPLIES TO HUMANS

That's the Libertarian anthem isn't it?
The tag line the Libertarian/Tea Baggers love is 'EVERYONE WANTS A FREE TICKET'.

If they saw our Constitution they would see we believe in Taxtation. It's simply part of America. The fact that Libertarian and Tea Party states pay less in taxation than what they spend is a bonus to my argument.
Click to expand...

Of course you can name just one of those LIBERTARIAN and TEA PARTY States, right Goober? We’ll wait, but we won’t hold our breath!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Name the state and provide how much more they spend than they tax Goober. We’ll wait but we won’t hold our breath!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Teflon Don said:
Grind needs a hobby. I live ethical questions, but shouldn't they have to have some basis in reality? It is easier to think Desh is sane than think something like this could be remotely plausible. I know you qualified it but come on. It isn't even medically possible let alone medically ethical
Click to expand...

BINGO!!
 
Anti-Party said:
It's extremely clear what point you and Fox News is and has been trying to make here;

SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST NOW APPLIES TO HUMANS

That's the Libertarian anthem isn't it? Why should I pay for your education? Why should I pay for your roads? Why should I pay for your government? Because Libertarians never use parks, bridges, roads, public education, city state or federal government..............................

The tag line the Libertarian/Tea Baggers love is 'EVERYONE WANTS A FREE TICKET'.

If they saw our Constitution they would see we believe in Taxtation. It's simply part of America. The fact that Libertarian and Tea Party states pay less in taxation than what they spend is a bonus to my argument.
Click to expand...

You really are an idiot aren't you? Read the 16th amendment.
 
Dammit Grind is it really too much to ask that forum members need to be at least as smart as Dubbya to join?
 
Doppelganger said:
lol.. tell you what, i'll throw you a bone. you can tax me for roads, parks, public gardens, and enjoy the 5 dollars a year it costs out of my pocket. that's not where the bloat is.
Click to expand...

It always makes me chuckle when the Statists cry "whAt, you don't want roads?", as if it were some sort of logical argument. We could be driving on gold plated streets with the amount of money the gobblement confiscates
 
Doppelganger said:
that's my argument. I'm not an organ donor for this exact reason. I don't care what they say, if a doctor is trying to save my life and they know in the back of their mind that if I die they might be able to save 5 people, that could influence them subconsciously.
Click to expand...

My organs can't be used. I don't have I worry about this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top