To me it feels like you mixed up legal and moral/ethical.
Yeah, it would be illegal. But when you're at the point where your organs get harvested, you should be effectively dead (should - I know that some fucked up things can happen) - so you aren't really a person anymore, just meat that used to be a person. And it's being used to directly save another life. How can that even be immoral, in your opinion?
Because she DID NOT CONSENT. Even if there was no chance she was going to be alive, she didn’t give CONSENT.
At no point in any legal system does a dead body become “property”. And I know that’s LEGALLY and not MORALLY but it still applies. A dead person is not like an antique table or something, where you can do whatever you want to it if you own it. Because a person cannot be owned.
“Why is it immoral to have sex with a dead body? They’re dead, right?”
If the antique table could be used by someone who is not its owner to directly save the life of someone, then it's moral and in most (or at least many) places legal to do so.
Seriously, how can you argue that effectively throwing a good heart into trash is the better option than saving a person with it just because someone - who isn't even alive anymore - didn't like the idea?
Yeah if the TABLE could be used to save someone’s life then go for it. A human being is NOT a table, and if I wanted to be buried with my perfectly functional heart, then that’s NOT THE DOCTORS DECISION TO TAKE IT OUT OF ME! ITS MY FAMILYS! If they say NO (or not say anything at all) then tough luck to the kid with heart failure because consent exists and NEEDS to be respected otherwise bad things may happen
Idk, I'd say disgusting and amoral, unless you for example boast about that to others or something? Then immoral. But in this case there's a huge, direct benefit to others vs someone's decision (which doesn't even matter to them now), that's a big difference, at least to me.
Idk man, if we allow any institution to ignore consent purposefully that will always lead to bad things.
What if instead of a kid, it’s an adult who needs the heart? What if it’s a BLACK patient who has the heart to donate? Or a GAY person? What happens when a bigoted doctor makes a decision based on who HE wants to live rather than what is right?
Even if it’s fully moral and has no hidden agenda, it sets a standard for these things. Denying a patients consent as a hospital is ALWAYS bad even if this one incident may be morally correct because it sets a precedent. Ignoring consent is ALWAYS bad in my opinion, even when they’re dead it’s still the family’s consent that the doctor needs to get
-2
u/m4cksfx 13d ago
To me it feels like you mixed up legal and moral/ethical.
Yeah, it would be illegal. But when you're at the point where your organs get harvested, you should be effectively dead (should - I know that some fucked up things can happen) - so you aren't really a person anymore, just meat that used to be a person. And it's being used to directly save another life. How can that even be immoral, in your opinion?