Baby Theresa Utilitarian Point of View

Baby Theresa was a newborn baby who was born with a rare health condition called anencephaly. Anencephaly is a disease where babies are born with no upper part of the skull as well as missing portions of their brain. Their partially developed brain can still breathe and produce a heartbeat, however they have a very short life expectancy. Taking this into consideration, baby Theresa’s parents decided that they would donate her working organs to any struggling babies that could have their life saved by Theresa’s functioning crucial organs. However, when this unusual case was taken to court, the judge denied Theresa’s parents request. This was due to the existence of a law that states that an organ donor must be dead to donate their organs, and that giving away Theresa’s organs would interrupt the natural course of her life. Baby Theresa died shortly after the court case and her organs became unusable.

Therefore, I believe that the court order for Baby Theresa to live out her full lifespan, instead of allowing for her organs to be donated, was the wrong decision. I believe that in baby Theresa’s case that the utilitarian point of view is the best way to act on the situation. Being a utilitarian means that you do something that results in higher happiness for everyone and letting the doctors use Theresa’s organs would have done so. Having her alive for a few extra days may have caused other suffering children to die as well. If the doctors were permitted to carry out this beneficial action, and salvage Theresa’s healthy organs, they could have saved multiple lives rather than enabling Theresa’s, whose end was inevitable.

Keeping Theresa alive instead of respecting their wishes to donate her organs also caused her parents more pain and suffering than what was necessary. If they had been able to donate her organs to another family in order to keep their child alive, it would have brought a lot of light on such a grim situation. Putting Theresa out of her