Overall argues that no child, even if respected and cared for, should be primarily a means to his parents’ and sibling’s end. For her, this is inconsistent with a “close, warm loving familial relationship in which a child can thrive while developing his own talents and purposes” (Overall 86). Also, she adds that parents are in a situation of a conflict of interest where the focus will always be on the sick child rather than what is in the best interest of the savior sibling. This might lead to the latter being perpetually made the ‘sacrificial lamb’ even at the expense of his or her own development.
Others argue that the savior sibling is a special creation of the parents and provides the means by which the second child lives, thus, the parents …show more content…
Arguably, savior siblings grow up and mature much faster than other children owing to their early extensive exposure to medical procedures. In the book version of My Sister’s Keeper, Anna declares, “my parents tried to make things normal, but that’s a relative term. The truth is, I was never really a kid…nearly every time Kate’s hospitalized, I wind up there too” (9-10). Being a continuous donor without giving consent infringes on the savior sibling’s autonomy. It is neither fair nor ethical to deny a child the right to make medical decisions regarding his or her own body, especially when they can do so. And if in fact, as echoed in the words of Kate, the many procedures force maturity onto a child, it can be argued that a savior sibling should be expected to make medical decisions at a younger age than other children. The fact that the parents continue to allow medical procedures to be done on a healthy baby is a breach of the fundamental right of the child’s right to autonomy. This raises the question of whether and when a savior sibling should be granted medical emancipation. Should the line be drawn after X number of bone marrow transplant, invasive surgeries with potentially life-altering effects or the child simply not wanting to undergo the pain of any more medical
Others argue that the savior sibling is a special creation of the parents and provides the means by which the second child lives, thus, the parents …show more content…
Arguably, savior siblings grow up and mature much faster than other children owing to their early extensive exposure to medical procedures. In the book version of My Sister’s Keeper, Anna declares, “my parents tried to make things normal, but that’s a relative term. The truth is, I was never really a kid…nearly every time Kate’s hospitalized, I wind up there too” (9-10). Being a continuous donor without giving consent infringes on the savior sibling’s autonomy. It is neither fair nor ethical to deny a child the right to make medical decisions regarding his or her own body, especially when they can do so. And if in fact, as echoed in the words of Kate, the many procedures force maturity onto a child, it can be argued that a savior sibling should be expected to make medical decisions at a younger age than other children. The fact that the parents continue to allow medical procedures to be done on a healthy baby is a breach of the fundamental right of the child’s right to autonomy. This raises the question of whether and when a savior sibling should be granted medical emancipation. Should the line be drawn after X number of bone marrow transplant, invasive surgeries with potentially life-altering effects or the child simply not wanting to undergo the pain of any more medical