Is Advocating for the Adoption of Anencephalic Babies Ethical or Practical?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Loren Booda
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the ethical and practical implications of advocating for the adoption of anencephalic babies, particularly in light of a local advertisement promoting the idea. Participants explore the potential changes in abortion policy, the quality of life for these infants, and the allocation of resources for their care versus other children in need.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that a local advertisement claims 80% of fetuses with only a brain stem are aborted, questioning the implications of advocating for parents to keep such children.
  • Another participant expresses surprise at the possibility of survival for anencephalic babies with only a brain stem for a brain.
  • Some participants speculate that with life support, a child might survive longer, but they express concern that this intention could be seen as macabre.
  • One participant argues that without higher brain functions, an anencephalic child would lack perception or cognition, suggesting that their existence may not be meaningful and questioning the allocation of resources for their care.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the ethical implications of advocating for the care of anencephalic babies, with some questioning the practicality and meaningfulness of such lives, while others are surprised by the potential for survival. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight uncertainties regarding the quality of life for anencephalic babies and the ethical considerations of resource allocation, but do not resolve these issues.

Loren Booda
Messages
3,115
Reaction score
4
A local religious station ran an advertisement saying that 80% of fetuses with only a brain stem for a brain are aborted. The ad tries to convince parents of such fetuses to bear and keep them the four or so years they would be expected to live. This group also seeks to place similar "special needs" children, as they have 7,000 others.

Does this presage a change in abortion policy - forcing parents to care for, or using adoption resources on, those children without brains while millions more practically "deserving" kids worldwide go without guardianship? Can one determine the quality of life or humanness for anencephalic babies?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I had no idea a human could survive even that long with only a brain stem.
 
I question that too, but perhaps with slightly higher brain functions or life support the person would survive. Such intention to save the life would border on the macabre.
 
Loren Booda said:
I question that too, but perhaps with slightly higher brain functions or life support the person would survive. Such intention to save the life would border on the macabre.

There are no higher functions without the brain. Such a child would be incapable of any perception or cognition. The lungs and heart operate autonomically so would be unaffected, but a child with no brain would not be able to feed itself. I suppose it can survive for some amount of time with a great deal of assistance, but its existence would hardly be more meaningful than that of a garbage disposal. There is no reason to waste resources like this.