The Argument Dignity Of Savior Sibling
The two perspectives on savior siblings which seek to discuss if it is ethically appropriate to conceive a savior sibling. Through analyzing and evaluating whether or not the inherent dignity of the sick and savior sibling is upheld. This is using the four quadrant framework to help justify on a personal (the savior sibling) and a social level whether it is ethically just to create savior siblings. To an extent commodifying the inherent dignity of a person, to savior, another is the person can be perceived as selfish. This is because people should never be seen as material objects, which can ‘be used to a means to an end’ (ref). Due to compromising the inherent dignity of the savior sibling in accordance with a 1A and 1B argument. The child
loses their inherent dignity during the process of conception. This is the result of the amount of technology and scientific research which is done through reproductive technology, inevitably causing the child to be created to be used for materialist purposes.
Also, it is important to take into account that people are multidimensional beings. Therefore, since the post-scientific revolution, it is important to note that savior siblings have the rights to their own body and personal life purpose. It is not the doctors or the parent’s duty to assign the savior siblings purpose to simply save the sick sibling. Through ‘playing God’, parents and doctors neglect the inherent dignity of the savior sibling. However, if the child is willing and accepts their purpose of saving the sick sibling, it enhances the inherent dignity of the savior sibling. Human dignity is enhanced, through the savior sibling willingly donating lifesaving tissue to save their sick sibling. Thus is in accordance with a 1A perspective.
The issue of savior siblings is an ethically complicated problem. Primarily because the notion of creating a savior sibling can be perceived as going against nature, through the extensive amount of tampering done on the embryos and sperm. Plus, through trying to empathize with the doctors who suggest to the parents the idea of conceiving a savior sibling. The parents who go to such drastic measures to save their sick child. Then, there is the welfare of the savior sibling and whether or not they accept their life purpose. Through wanting to donate their tissue to save their sick sibling.
loses their inherent dignity during the process of conception. This is the result of the amount of technology and scientific research which is done through reproductive technology, inevitably causing the child to be created to be used for materialist purposes.
Also, it is important to take into account that people are multidimensional beings. Therefore, since the post-scientific revolution, it is important to note that savior siblings have the rights to their own body and personal life purpose. It is not the doctors or the parent’s duty to assign the savior siblings purpose to simply save the sick sibling. Through ‘playing God’, parents and doctors neglect the inherent dignity of the savior sibling. However, if the child is willing and accepts their purpose of saving the sick sibling, it enhances the inherent dignity of the savior sibling. Human dignity is enhanced, through the savior sibling willingly donating lifesaving tissue to save their sick sibling. Thus is in accordance with a 1A perspective.
The issue of savior siblings is an ethically complicated problem. Primarily because the notion of creating a savior sibling can be perceived as going against nature, through the extensive amount of tampering done on the embryos and sperm. Plus, through trying to empathize with the doctors who suggest to the parents the idea of conceiving a savior sibling. The parents who go to such drastic measures to save their sick child. Then, there is the welfare of the savior sibling and whether or not they accept their life purpose. Through wanting to donate their tissue to save their sick sibling.