How do you feel about this? I understand a person’s body is their own, but she refuses to donate bone marrow to save the life of her own brother, who has three kids to live for. The story is located here:
If my brother were dying, there is no way I would not give him anything on my body he needed to try and save his life.
Hmmmm…what went on in that family, anyhoo? :dubious:
It appears from this story that there is an intense loathing between the parties. Clearly she believes he deserves to die. Perhaps in the past there was a very significant wrong done to the sister (think sexual abuse) that the family has refused to acknowledge or confront.
There is someone in my family that meets this scenario, I can imagine events playing out identically to what is portrayed in the article. Although in the particular case I am thinking of, the offender died young of natural causes, in life I don’t think that the recipient of the abuse would have pissed on him if he were on fire, as the saying goes. And she is a very caring person in general.
Yes, I would think there has to be something going on or that had gone on in the past between the brother and sister. I am not close to my brother (I don’t even really like him) and we are strikingly different in our lifestyle and attitudes toward simply everything. Except we both like smoking and eating and computers. Anyway, despite not being close, and being particularly fond of him, I still love him, and would not hesitate to donate whatever was needed.
I think it has to be more than a dislike of each other.
So it couldn’t be that perhaps she is just colder than ice, incredibly selfish, self-absorbed, narcissistic, or just plain uncaring?
I did see any “intense loathing” in the story. The article said “The pair have never been close although their children are similar ages and play together.”
Sexual abuse? That’s quite a leap from the available information.
There are people in this world who would wait until their nail polish dries before calling 911 for someone else in an emergency because they are number one in their mind no matter what the situation.
She may have a vaild reason for standing by and watching her brother die. It’s not clear from the article if she has any real reason at all.
She has every right to refuse, reason or no reason, as it is her body; but damn … that’s cold.
Maybe there’s an inheritance in the future; with her brother out of the picture, maybe her share will be larger???
My brother stole thousands (roughly $20k) from our Grandmother putting her into debt when all she has is a pension. He lost all “but we’re family!” privileges through his own making. It’s very easy to judge these things from the outside without having both sides.
She originally agreed to do it. Something happened to make her change her mind. I don’t see anything that hints at sexual abuse. Where the fuck did that come from? Maybe she’s just off the beam.
I don’t see intense loathing if their children play together. Would she let her children play with his children if he’s some violent sex predator?
Plus, she had herself tested as a potential donor then changed her mind.
Both the brother and his partner have asked Helen for an explanation. If he feared what her answer would be, why ask?
Based on what little we know, I think it’s as safe to assume she’s a nutcase as anything more nefarious.
And those who refused Caesarian sections to save their babies, merely to avoid a scar.
I’m going to join LurkerInNJ in disagreeing with this. You have no trouble believing without evidence that the woman’s brother is such a foul beast that he would sexually abuse her, yet assume that she would never deny him a bone marrow transplant without a good reason. Couldn’t she be the foul beast?
Some folk here are making presumption based on the rather dangerous view that if something bad happens, then somehow it must be deserved, and it must be somehow the fault of the victim.
The story has not been fully revealed, that is pretty clear, he may or may not be anything at all, he may be just a fairly ordinary victim and nothing else.
I wonder if it had been the other way around, brother not donating to sister, those folk would feel quite as free to hint that there may be some abusive factor in the background, I doubt it, we would simply call the him an A-hole more than likely.
All I can say is shame on you.
You are right; I greatly jumped to that conclusion.
However, I think it is safe to say there are only two real conclusions:
He did say “perhaps.” The point is, there’s not enough information to know who the “bad guy” is here, or even if there is a bad guy.
That was pretty bizarre Hello Again.
I know a woman that needs a kidney and her sister won’t donate her kidney because “her husband won’t let her.”
Barring any hatred or abuse situations, I’d say that she is under no obligation to help and should not be condemned for not helping, but should be commended if she decides to help.
I don’t see any great ethical debate, here, just some opinions, (some thoughtful, some less so).
Off to IMHO.
[ /Moderating ]
Lower the ages of the parties involved and things would get interesting. What if the sister was still a minor? Would it be right for her parents to force her to donate to save her brother’s life? Would her age matter (big difference between a 7 yr old and a 17 yr old)? Would his age matter (say he’s a small child)? Would they even be able to find doctors willing carry out the extraction against her will (even if it meant putting her in restraints just to get her to the hospital)?
Per this cite (pdf):
So, um, yes, I’d agree that society needn’t compel one to actively interfere for the benefit of another in situations like this. We generally get to decide what risks we’re willing to assume for ourselves. That said, I absolutely will condemn this refusal (assuming unusual info is not forthcoming) as an immoral, selfish decision.
I wonder how pro-life folks feel about this.
We have a woman not wanting to use her body to keep another body alive. Barring a miracle, this body will surely die without her help.
In the case of pregnant mothers, pro-lifers feel that the government should protect the rights of the dependent body. Life should be preserved at all costs, they say.
Why doesn’t the same logic apply here? If we ban abortion, is there a slippery slope waiting for us regarding organ donation?
I don’t know. But I bet their Sunday dinners were so much fun growing up.
Brother: Hey sis, can you pass the liver and onions?
Sis: No, dammit! It’s MINE!