Imagine a scenario where a child is born with a rare and severe medical condition that leads to significant suffering over time. While the child initially appears healthy, the condition causes progressive physical changes and developmental challenges. Despite these challenges, the child remains mentally sharp and emotionally aware.
This condition is life-threatening, with a drastically reduced life expectancy, often cutting short the possibility of reaching adulthood. Treatments exist that might alleviate some symptoms and potentially extend life, but they don't offer a cure and could involve extensive, long-term care.
Parents are faced with a tough choice:
Should they approve a medical procedure that might extend their child's life, knowing it could lead to ongoing and expensive care?
Or should they decide against it, which could result in their child's death?
For this discussion, let's focus on the ethics of the decision itself and not on who has the authority to decide.
Respond to one of the following prompts:
Drawing from one of the moral systems we've explored (e.g., virtue ethics, Kantian ethics, or utilitarianism), assess whether it's ethical for the parents to decline the medical procedure. (USLOs 9.1, 9.2, 9.3)
Using one of the moral systems we've studied, analyze whether parents in this situation are morally obligated to issue a do-not-resuscitate order given the significant suffering involved. (USLOs 9.1, 9.2, 9.3)