Please point out who said there was no risk.
The dying man’s wife told his sister there were no risks.
Same here, even if there was a risk to myself. I couldn’t imagine looking any of my family members in the face again if I allowed a sibling to die.
disregard.
:dubious:
Oh, okay. Your edit took effect on preview. Weird.
I think my biggest problem is the title of that sensationalist article - “I have been sentenced to death by my sister.” Bullshit. You have been sentenced to death by a rampant case of leukemia; you have a chance for treatment/remission from this disease from your sister donating a part of her body to you (and her donation is no guarantee of anything, either), but she is not the reason you are dying.
My opinion on what the sister is doing? On the surface it looks despicable, but I don’t know the whole situation, and it’s not my decision to make.
I must disagree. I think you ARE obligated to help your family stay alive, and anyone who wouldn’t - again, barring some unusual background - is a scumbag.
Absent more information, however, it’s impossible to say in this case.
I don’t think this story is a good analogy for abortion, since I think most people see an ethical difference between allowing a person to die of natural causes (even if the cause is treatable) vs. choosing to directly kill a person. This woman’s choice not to help her brother doesn’t prevent him from seeking help from some other donor, unlike the case of abortion where the fetus is directly killed.
Another problem with this analogy is that in most pregnancies the mother consented to sex (which pro-lifers might see as having “invited” the risk of pregnancy), whereas in this case the sister is not in any way responsible for her brother’s illness.
For such reasons, I don’t see any legal basis for requiring the sister to help her brother. However, while people certainly have the legal right to be a selfish jerk, the rest of us also have a right to say how we feel about their jerkishness. Unless there is something the sister isn’t telling about this story, I think it’s pretty horrible for her to be this way.
If I or someone I cared about were dying and there was someone who could help that chose not to, you bet your sweet bippy I’d take my story to the media and try to shame the person into helping. Of course, I’d also be trying very hard to get more bone marrow donors tested in the slim hope of finding someone else who matches.
Cause Diseases are SACRED!
Diseases are a Gift from God!
/Hey look, a hand basket!
I think that it is just as unethical to turn a stranger down as it is to turn a sibling down. But it still has to remain the donor’s decision.
Do you mean legally or morally obligagted?
Im curious that people seem to have such a clear division between ‘family’ and ‘people in general’ on this issue.
Does anyone think people who arent donors are scumbags, given that by doing so you could be condemning someone needlessly to a fairly horrible death? Or is this only the case when its in regard to a particular family member that one does not register as a donor?
Otara
You seriously don’t see a difference between a man’s only sister who initially agreed to donate, was tested and then backed out compared to a perfect stranger?
I think it’s more “registered, was tested, was a good match, agreed to donate and then reneged” that’s the issue, more than WHO she reneged on. That it is family makes it more difficult to understand.
I see a difference, its the magnitude of difference Im a bit surprised by. As in why does it seem to matter so much whether you know them or not?
The order seems to be
1/ Get tested, known match for family member, pull out, complete scumbag.
2/ Get tested - if known match for stranger and pull out, lesser scumbag or possibly not even that.
3/ Dont get tested/not on registry - minor or no criticism at all.
Im wondering if the ‘Id do anything for a family member’ donation wise is partly a rationalisation for why we dont have to do anything for anyone else on this issue, ie it functions to justify to ourselves why we dont take action on the issue ourselves as a more general donor.
Otara
Just a thought, of course, but perhaps she hasn’t given her reason as she doesn’t feel like being judged.
You know, kind of like is going on here.
I choose to believe that no sister, having been matched, would pull out without cause.
Because I haven’t been told the cause does not diminish it’s validity in any way.
Perhaps she promised to help on condition of anonymity, or some other condition which they failed to respect.
I’m just saying, does anyone really believe there isn’t more to this?
How about this.
-
Brother has cancer, get tested and you are a match. Lead brother to believe you will donate. When brother needs marrow say you changed your mind. * Dipshit*
-
Saying that if a family member was in the same situation you’d do everything you could to help them and you’d donate marrow to save their life. * Normal human response for most people. *
-
Saying you’d really like to help anyone in this situation and sign up on the donor registry. Highly commendable.
You’re trying to make the leap that #1 and #3 are the same thing. Can’t do it.
An interesting fiction book to read which has similar themes is
My Sister’s Keeper by Jodi Picoult
That book will really make you see these sorts of issues very differently.
It isn’t an exact match to this by any stretch–but the themes echo strongly. In the book a family has a child who has a rare form of cancer, and a exact match for bone marrow is needed. They basically harvest eggs to find an exact match and produce another child—for the purposes of using her bone marrow, etc to fix the sick child. Eventually the child sues her parents for medical emancipation–which of course means her sister will die. Very good book–I would recommend it.
Things are rarely as black and white as we would like them to be.
I would cut off my legs with a rusty chainsaw if doing so would save my sister’s life. However, my parents? Not so much*. You never know what’s really, really, really going on inside some families, and I think that for the woman to put up with this kind of public harrassment, she’s got to be convinced that her choice is the correct one. And, I firmly believe, it’s her right to make the choice.
- Disgusting, hate-filled invective directed at my parents, redacted…
Why would you inflict that book on these nice and innocent people? The writing was poor and the ending was ridiculous*. Allow me to sum up the story for everyone. It took the mom 13 years to get the family she always wanted.
*The young girl was put up to the emancipation by her sister because she (the sister with cancer) was tired and just wanted to die. Which negates the whole point of the book which was Should she be allowed to make her own medical decisions? The young girl struggles with this and manages to win the lawsuit just in time to get in a car accident and die. Her organs are harvested. (Older sis currently needs a kidney or liver or something) Older sis magically gets well. Older brother who has been going on an arsonist rampage stops because his dad says, “Son, sorry for ignoring your needs.” And the book ends with everyone well-adjusted. The psychos.
Sorry for the hijack.
As far as the OP goes, I don’t think very well of the this Helen Pretty, but I try not to judge because it really seems like there is more behind the scenes.