Skip to main content

Creating Children to Save Siblings’ Lives

A Case Study for Kantian Ethics

  • Chapter
Bioethics and the Fetus

Part of the book series: Biomedical Ethics Reviews ((BER))

Abstract

Life quickly got more complicated for the Ayala family when, in the Spring of 1990, they drew the attention of the popular and semitechnical press.1 Only two years before, Abe and Mary Ayalas’ 17-year-old daughter, Anissa, was diagnosed with chronic myelogenous leukemia, a disease that rarely afflicts persons under the age of thirty. The only hope for a cure, the Ayalas were told, was to be found in a bone marrow transplant. Anissa’s old marrow would first be destroyed by radiation and chemotherapy. New marrow, donated by an individual whose antigens and tissue type were matched to Anissa’s, would then be injected through a vein. The search for a donor began. Members of the immediate family were tested and no match was found. More distant relatives of the family were tested, and again, no match was found. Transplant registries operating at the national level were contacted and they failed to identify a suitable donor. It seemed there was no other reasonable course of action left to try.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. See Time,March, 5,1990, vol. 135; People Weekly,March 5, 1990, vol. 33; and American Medical News,March 2, 1990, vol. 33.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Discussions of similar kinds of cases have already appeared in the medical ethics literature. See,for example, Alan Fine (1988) The ethics of fetal tissue transplants, Hastings Center Report (June/July), 18 5–8. See also John Robertson (1988) Rights, symbolism and public policy in fetal tissue transplants, Hastings Center Report (December), 18 5–12.

    Google Scholar 

  3. There is at least one writer I know of who would probably agree with this assessment, although for wildly different reasons. See Mary Ann Warren’s piece in Mary Ann Warren, Daniel Maguire, and Carol Levine (1978), Can the fetus be an organ farm? Hastings Center Report,(October), 8 23–25.

    Google Scholar 

  4. There are other discussions of the application of Kantianprinciples to problems in medical ethics. See,for just one example, J. W. Walters and Stephen Ashwal (1988) Organ prolongation in anencephalic infants: Ethical and medical concerns, Hastings Center Report (October/ November), 18 19–27.

    Google Scholar 

  5. See,for example, the comments by George Annas and Richard McCormick (1990) in American Medical News,(March 2), 33, 3,9.

    Google Scholar 

  6. This passage is taken from Kant’s (1964) Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (H. J. Paton, eds.), Harper and Row, NY, p. 96. The itallics are Kant’s. Hereafter, I shall refer to this piece as The Groundwork.

    Google Scholar 

  7. For more on the complicated issue of “derivability,” the interested reader might wish to consult Bruce Aune (1979) Kant’s Theory of Morals,Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp. 70–77.

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8 People Weekly,March 5, 1990, vol. 33, vol. 135. See also Time,March 5, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  9. The Groundwork,p. 95. All emphases are Kant’s.

    Google Scholar 

  10. The Groundwork, p. 96. The emphasis is Kant’s.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Incidentally, H. J. Paton, in his translation of The Groundwork, observes in a footnote that “… `simply’ is essential to Kant’s meaning since we all have to use other men as means.” The Groundwork, p. 139. See also Paton (1958) The Categorical Imperative: A Study in Kant’s Moral Philosophy, Hutchinson, London, p. 165. For discussion of Paton’s view of the imperative, see The Concept of the Categorical Imperative (1968), T. C. Williams, Oxford University Press, London, pp. 67–79.

    Google Scholar 

  12. I don’t think it is altogether fair to blame Kant for the unclarity. As I explain in the next section of the chapter, there are some things Kant does say that can be used to solve this problem.

    Google Scholar 

  13. The Groundwork,p. 97. The emphasis is Kant’s.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1991 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Drebushenko, D.W. (1991). Creating Children to Save Siblings’ Lives. In: Humber, J.M., Almeder, R.F. (eds) Bioethics and the Fetus. Biomedical Ethics Reviews. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59259-445-0_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59259-445-0_5

  • Publisher Name: Humana Press, Totowa, NJ

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4757-4609-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-59259-445-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics