Question:
Hypothetical?
This started up some heated debate elsewhere so I thought I'd introduce it to the distinguished members of the YA philosophy board :)
Let's say Jane goes into a deep coma. The doctors fully expect her to die. Her family agrees to let her organs be donated. The surgeon removes Jane's kidney and it is transplanted into Jill, who has lethal kidney failure and needs Jane's new kidney to survive.
But then, out of nowhere, Jane wakes up! Her family rejoices at the miracle. When Jane realizes that she is short one kidney, she is furious and is determined to get it back. However, she cannot regain full control of that body part without killing Jill. Is it acceptable, either legally or morally, for her to do so? (Bearing in mind that Jane can still live with just one kidney.)
I'm willing to bet that all the pro-choicers side with Jane and all the pro-lifers with Jill.
Additional Details6 days ago
Of course I believe the doctors made a huge mistake in this case. We can sue them later. For the moment, how do we satisfy the conflicting rights of Jane and Jill?
Best Answer - Chosen by Asker:
6 days agoOf course I believe the doctors made a huge mistake in this case. We can sue them later. For the moment, how do we satisfy the conflicting rights of Jane and Jill?