A hypothetical

[The Bellman]

Imagine the following hypothetical scenario:

You wake up one morning with a lump in your abdomen. You see a doctor and discover that without your knowledge or consent, a strange device has been implanted in your body. It is linked to a man who is very ill. For the next six months, the doctor tells you, you will carry this device around in your abdomen, and the food and drink you absorb will, via it (through some weird and fantastic technology), nourish this sick man, for he is unable to take nourishment for himself. You can, at any stage, have the device removed, but if you do so, the man will immediately die. If you keep it for six months, you will then have it removed and he will be well again.

Do you have the moral right to remove the device before the six months are up?

PS. I realise that this is a very unlikely situation - it's a hypothetical. So please, if your response is "That's so unlikely that it's not even worth an answer," then don't bother to post that - just don't post at all. The whole point is that it's a hypothetical.

 

[CSMR]

I don't think you would have the moral right, since given the new situation one is in, removing the device would be murder, morally speaking. (I steel myself for the equivalent situation which suggests the opposite answer!)

 

[prayerposition17]

If you don't die hey who cares keep it treat it like a baby or somethin cause ur "giving life" hiphiphooray we're all good ppl.

 

[Broken Doll]

Please, no one get upset with me, but I believe you do have the right to take it out because it is your body and the device was put there without your knowledge. If you do take it out, you shouldn't be held responsible for the man's death, the doctor that put the device in your body should be held responsible. He put you in a situation where you didn't really have much of a choice and took advantage of your body for someone else's benefit. If he wanted to save the man's life, then he should've had the device put inside his body instead. But I personally would keep it in because life is very important to me and I don't want the man to die, but I'd also be furious for being put in a situation like that. If I would've been asked to do it, then I would happily agree to it.

Broken Doll

 

[mpshiel]

I guess first I'd start looking for "other" lumps. But personally - if it isn't damaging me and helping me, why not? It seems like a non issue. If on the other hand it was taking six months off of my life and giving them to him - I don't know - that would take more thought

 

[Jetgirl]

Imagine the following hypothetical scenario:

You wake up one morning with a lump in your abdomen. You see a doctor and discover that without your knowledge or consent, a strange device has been implanted in your body. It is linked to a man who is very ill. For the next six months, the doctor tells you, you will carry this device around in your abdomen, and the food and drink you absorb will, via it (through some weird and fantastic technology), nourish this sick man, for he is unable to take nourishment for himself. You can, at any stage, have the device removed, but if you do so, the man will immediately die. If you keep it for six months, you will then have it removed and he will be well again.

Do you have the moral right to remove the device before the six months are up?

PS. I realise that this is a very unlikely situation - it's a hypothetical. So please, if your response is "That's so unlikely that it's not even worth an answer," then don't bother to post that - just don't post at all. The whole point is that it's a hypothetical.

If it were just that, I'd do it, I would mind that much.

Compared to the reality where you carry an embreyo for nine months, your body and health are drastically changed, then you have to pay for the darn thing for 18 more years, that looks like a pretty good deal!

 

[hemis]

If you believe in morals, then I guess you don't have the right.
Is this supposed to be about abortion? Seems as if you replace fetus with lump and nine months with six. I can't help but feel you have alternative motives in posting this thread to trick people into somehow compromising their beliefs.

 

[The Bellman]

If you believe in morals, then I guess you don't have the right.

Everybody "believes" in morals. The question is WHAT morals they have or believe in. Even a person who thinks that NOTHING is morally wrong "believes" in morals - his morals are that nothing is morally wrong.

I can't help but feel you have alternative motives in posting this thread to trick people into somehow compromising their beliefs.

Umm...alternative to what? How about I posted this thread to get people's opinions?

 

[Stellar Vision]

I suppose I would say that you don't have the right to remove the implant IF your life is not in jeopardy. Doing so, you would knowingly allow the man to die when you are able to save him. That would be neglectful in a way.