Ethical dilema: Waterhouse twins

I am, after all, a Doctor. I am a highly skilled surgeon with a thriving and well respected practice. I do what is physically possible to help individuals. This has been my training and my life’s goal. In the situation with the Waterhouse girls, I want to help them. I want to help the parents keep their daughter, and their family, but there are many ethical issues I must consider before making my decision regarding the operation. I must make my decision with sensitivity and reasoning, be willing to carry it out and to deal with the consequences.

In this situation, to refrain from action actually harms an individual. And although, it may injure another (Meg) temporarily (i.e., getting her to the hospital , any surgery wounds, etc.), it would save her sister’s life. I am physically and legally able to do this procedure. Without it, Irene will die. The parents have given consent, but Meg has not.

Does the issue of Irene’s life and death outweigh Meg’s ability to make her own choices? Perhaps this can be justified with the thought that two lives are better than one. By donating a small piece of tissue, Meg could save an entire life. The organ

The problem here is that the donation is not voluntary.

This case is essentially robbing Peter to pay Paul… and hoping Peter will eventually get over it. But, what if Meg does not recover from the operation? She has already been through all the counseling and psychotherapy possibilities and has not yet changed her mind regarding the desire to donate her kidney. There is no reason to think that she will suddenly become satisfied with this decision after the operation.

The question we are left with is: Is it fair to violate one person’s rights in order to save another’s? Ethically, I want to do what is right and good. Helping Irene to live would be right and good, but going against Meg’s will and violating her body would not be. Though young, children have rights. Perhaps less rights, but rights nonetheless. Although her parents are her legal guardians and the laws may allow me to operate with their permission, Meg is 14 years old. She is old enough to know what is going on, old enough to understand and be aware of the decision and the consequences. The only thing that allows me to operate on her is the fact that she is not of legal age (18). Had she been four years older, the entire ethical debate would not exist because we would have to respect her rights. Though 14, Meg understands the situation and is able to make decisions regarding her bodily integrity. These wishes should be respected.

If I was Meg, I would want my wishes to be understood and respected and would not want my kidney separated from my body against my will. If I was Irene, I would like

Some topics in this essay:
Getting Meg, , Helping Irene, Irene Meg, negatively affect, child abuse doctor, getting meg hospital, rights rights, meg donate, abuse doctor, own body, getting meg, child abuse, irene live, legal issues, meg hospital,