Name: Tacata, Angeline B.

Course & Section: BSN- 2A

When we have to decide how to react in light of our values in response to an event, we are faced
with an ethical dilemma. We must decide between right and bad and make a sound judgment
based on our beliefs and principles. Furthermore, making a decision in a life-or-death scenario is
frequently challenging. It is critical to examine your alternatives when saving a life, but it is also
critical to ensure that other people’s lives are not jeopardized.

The mother of two girls, Kate, who was stricken with leukemia, and Anna, her youngest child,
who at a young age became her sister’s donor, Sara, is just one example of a person who is put to
the test by many medical scenarios. In trying to preserve one life, the family’s story poses a
challenging moral conundrum wherein another life is also brought dangerously close to the
death. I think the parents’ actions are unethical, despite the fact that they were battling with
knowing what to do to save a life. Using a child’s body against her will is unethical, regardless of
whether she is of age to make decisions for herself. No one’s right to life should ever be denied,
but a child’s exercise of that right shouldn’t be penalized. Parents have a great deal of moral
latitude when it comes to rearing and caring for their kids, as long as they act in the child’s best
interests and don’t harm them. Parents have the moral and legal right to consent or deny it. This
power, though, pales in significance when compared to the independence of judgment enjoyed
by competent individuals.

Parents are in charge of raising their children, and if they don’t, the government may step in.
Sara’s authority as a parent ended when she failed to respect Anna’s decision to exercise her right
to organ donation. Most people will behave immediately in their own best interests when faced
with ethical difficulties in the family, without even thinking about how their actions can affect
someone else’s rights. I think that before coming up with a solution or taking action in this kind
of phenomenon, everything should be carefully considered. Altruism occurs if a donor chooses to
donate. Altruism is the willingness to put oneself in harm’s way for the benefit of others.
Therefore, before to donation, consent must be obtained, regardless of the donor’s age.
Considering that the parents’ child’s life is in danger, we may also draw the conclusion that the
parents' acts are motivated by altruistic feelings. In addition, their youngest child has been giving
to her sister without asking for permission for the past 11 years, relying only on the fact that I
can make decisions for her as a parent. If we evaluate those behaviors, Sara and her husband
have violated the rights of their youngest child; Anna’s plea for medical emancipation, in my
opinion, was the appropriate response. Sara and her husband violated the rights of their youngest
child; in my judgment, Anna’s request for medical emancipation was the appropriate response to
their actions. Furthermore, the action taken to meet these standards will not excuse the violation
of the rights of another child, especially in light of the family’s predicament and the reasonable
measures they took to save a life. Anna’s emancipation is something I would also support since I
believe that because our rights are our privileges, neither our age nor any physical limitations
should stand in the way of us exercising them.

Families and emotions in general can occasionally confuse our guiding morals and lead us to
resort to them. But if a life is in danger, we will take all reasonable measures to save it. Because
of this, it does not give us the right to jeopardize the rights and lives of others. Despite the moral
and ethical challenges we have faced, the child’s reluctance to give their organs is both ethically
and medically appropriate. Finally, it’s important to remember that, contrary to what many
people think, a person’s right to refuse is important and shouldn’t be violated.