Lets not be too naive here... Giving blood doesnt kill anyone but not many give blood....and we are talking about adults here whereas for BMT you expect a baby to provide the solution...😕
Raunaq, not true dear. A lot of healthy people also do not donate blood...reasons best known to them!
Qwerty, At first this sentence hit me strong. But then after a while I realize that you have a point here.
What if tomorrow the only option left to cure your dear one is cloning? Because a clone will have a perfect set of all your organs and actually work as a bank. This is what cloning supporters argue too. Would one agree to have a clone if there is no other option left? Hypothetical situation and arguments please.
I think we talk a lot and when it comes to delivering the stuff we talk of probabilities... First of all..coming to the ground level what diseases need cloning... For argument I can say people should be allowed to keep their dead ones mummified yet close to them..in their house. allow amniocentesis so on so forth.. Parents are not allowed to harm the kid even if its their kid.. So whereas the parents can decide what brand of car seat to buy.. they cant argue about doing away with the car seat and here we are planning to have a baby so that we can extract bone marrow...( as if its like buying a jam or peanutbutter ) to further any cause whatsoever...The saving of life has philosophical connotation - what if the couple subjects the baby to dereliction once the first one is fine..so on and so forth..... the whole idea is.. unless we can establish willingness on part of the donor... its illegal all the way... and since babies dont have volition teh parents will ahve to wait till he is 16 for them to make this call..and if the first one cant survive till then it will an unfortunate truth called life...😊 I know of two 8-10 year old kids in my neighborhood with JOD.. one of them died the other is on the verge.. Parents are spending a lot of money on their injections... Could it have be ethical to kill them because its hurting the parents economy to the point of impoverishment....since anyway they werent going to survive more than a few years and the parents could save lakhs and lakhs on a futile effort?
Edited by qwertyesque - 16 years agoI think we talk a lot and when it comes to delivering the stuff we talk of probabilities... First of all..coming to the ground level what diseases need cloning... For argument I can say people should be allowed to keep their dead ones mummified yet close to them..in their house. allow amniocentesis so on so forth.. Parents are not allowed to harm the kid even if its their kid.. So whereas the parents can decide what brand of car seat to buy.. they cant argue about doing away with the car seat and here we are planning to have a baby so that we can extract bone marrow...( as if its like buying a jam or peanutbutter ) to further any cause whatsoever...The saving of life has philosophical connotation - what if the couple subjects the baby to dereliction once the first one is fine..so on and so forth..... the whole idea is.. unless we can establish willingness on part of the donor... its illegal all the way... and since babies dont have volition teh parents will ahve to wait till he is 16 for them to make this call..and if the first one cant survive till then it will an unfortunate truth called life...😊 I know of two 8-10 year old kids in my neighborhood with JOD.. one of them died the other is on the verge.. Parents are spending a lot of money on their injections... Could it have be ethical to kill them because its hurting the parents economy to the point of impoverishment....since anyway they werent going to survive more than a few years and the parents could save lakhs and lakhs on a futile effort?
Wow Qwerty.. Nice points there really...except I disagree with you about willingness of donor (the part in red) because as we discussed earlier , any familiy member would be more then happy to be a donor for fellow member .. so that argument is like trying to justify something that is normally a given in a family structure.
But yeah if I were the parent then I can safely say that instead of playing god , I would leave the fate of the 1st child to destiny and god unless I don't want to be childless incase I have only one child in which case I would have 2nd baby anyway...
Edited by lighthouse - 16 years agoSorry for the degression...it was getting way too serious for me to handle....ignore it please😳
Serious arguments do become boring. So this is good. 😃.
Been there-done that. I think every household with more than one kid complaints of partiality. 😛 Poor parents.
oops forgot to mention article is a spoiler if you plan to watch it.
Thanks Anshu. Will check it out.
Wow Qwerty.. Nice points there really...except I disagree with you about willingness of donor (the part in red) because as we discussed earlier , any familiy member would be more then happy to be a donor for fellow member .. so that argument is like trying to justify something that is normally a given in a family structure.
Without casting aspersions on any family bonding I would say thats not true... its veri difficult to donate say a working kidney to a sibling.. the first reaction would be to buy it, loan it and so on... Parents do a lot still it wont be the first thing they will do.....may be the last resort...
The only thing we can donate without much fuss is blood and sometimes time.. Any body part will make us take a step back not because we dont love them but we do realize our physical existence...all said this is on case by case basis... its not too difficult for some to make sacrifices...
Edited by qwertyesque - 16 years agoYes. I have to say the same to you. Without knowing the actual procedure let us not call others names.
This is a sensititve topic so let us at least try to deal it that way and not equate certain procedures with car seat covers 🤢 and steering wheels.
