Raise 1 Kid , 2 Heads?

Off Topic
41

[quote]Professor X wrote:
masterblaster wrote:

I would most certainly contemplate that and my contemplation would tell me first that I am fortunate not to be the parent and secondly that I would not know what to do if I were. You really do think you or anyone else would know exactly what to do huh…wow.

MB

Where did I write that? Nice try at putting words in my mouth. I now dare you to find that implication in writing.

This does lead me to ask why, if the goal is to avoid discussion of it, you have chosen to respond at all.[/quote]

That’s because masterblaster has two heads as well. The master head sometimes loses control of the blaster head and thus confliction arises.

42

[quote]ill wrote:
If I could I’d use it in my travelling circus gig and earn millions.[/quote]

Seconded. Although in all honesty, I think I’d have to abort it. I just couldn’t deal with that shit. And not because I’m worried about what the child would go through, that’s such a copout. I’m just not willing to go through hell for someone I haven’t even met yet.

43

[quote]Professor X wrote:
What makes a whole person?[/quote]

Self-awareness, certainly. Though, for a newborn, regular activity of the cerbral cortex would suffice. (They aren’t quite yet able to express self-awareness, so some clinical test is necessary.)

[quote]pookie wrote:
Well, I’m a parent and that must be one of the most awful experience to have to go through.

If we (the parents) found ourselves in that situation, I guess we’d listen to the doctors’ advice. Depending on the viability of the babies, my guess is that we’d go with the decision that preserves the most life. If both head can survive off of one body, I guess we’d keep both.

The article states that machines are currently making sure one of the head gets enough oxygen to survive. From that, I guess that the outcomes are either A) Remove the oxygen deprived head and have the remaining baby lead as normal a life as possible or B) Keep both heads alive using a machine, but they live their whole lives in a hospital room.

It’s probably a bit more complicated than that, with probabilities of complications and various other scenarios where one or both babies die; but given the choice between A) and B) above, I think I’d go with A. I think that having one of the babies lead a normal life outweighs 2 babies living a hospital room life. If both head can live outside of an hospital setting, I’d lean towards B).

Either way, it’s an atrocious choice for any parent to have to make.[/quote]

If they both couldn’t survive outside the hospital, I’d make the same choice. Sacrifice the one child for the sake of the other, as well as the rest of the family and society. I think that’s considered the Utilitarian ethics of “greatest common good”, for those interested in Western philosophy.

44

Just from this thread alone, there are so many questions that the answer seems obvious.

Leave them together. That way, all of the questions could be answered once (or if) the baby grows in to a cognitively sound adult.

Even if the baby developes with some defects, it or they could be studied through out its life. Seems like separation or removal of one of the heads would waste an extremely rare opportunity to learn a whole lot.

45

[quote]Res Judicata wrote:
You raise the child as it is. It’s not a hard question. We have a duty to our children. And these children are entitled to life, just as any other human person is. It’s no different than raising a child with a handicap.

What would you do if your child was severely disabled? Here’s the right answer:

That guy rules at life. Amazing.

46

[quote]Kailash wrote:
Professor X wrote:
What makes a whole person?

Self-awareness, certainly. [/quote]

If that’s true, then why is there so much debate about abortions?

47

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
Just from this thread alone, there are so many questions that the answer seems obvious.

Leave them together. That way, all of the questions could be answered once (or if) the baby grows in to a cognitively sound adult.

Even if the baby developes with some defects, it or they could be studied through out its life. Seems like separation or removal of one of the heads would waste an extremely rare opportunity to learn a whole lot.
[/quote]

It’s that most of us consider them as persons, not as science projects. Hence the moral and ethical dilemmas.

48

[quote]EdChap wrote:
Cut the uglier head off and sew on a horses head to stop the bleeding. If something’s going to have two heads, at least make it cool.[/quote]

Funniest response ev4r!!!

49

[quote]Yo Momma wrote:
SirPhisticated wrote:
With todays technology there’s no way a woman can give birth to a child with two heads without knowing it first. In my opinion you’re an egoistic idiot, if you don’t choose an abortion, if you know the child will be severely disabled or retarded.

I may be a cynical asshole but that’s my opinion…

Most conjoined twins are born into the third world or whose parents have no access to pre-natal care. Some parents may also be religious fundamentalists who believe every sperm is sacred and even a genetic “abomination” is precious to the Lord.

I am a mother of 17 year old identical twin boys, who are very strong and healthy. I shudder to think of even a remote possibility that this could have happened during my pregnancy, because in retrospect, I probably would abort. Every time I see conjoined twins, I get the heebie-jeebies. No. it’s not a disease, but it is the combined feelings of shock, sorrow, disgust and fascination with a touch of chills and nausea.
[/quote]

My feelings exactly. I feel badly when I see those shows and have to change the channel because it is real and those parents can’t just keep clicking…

This thread is not what I needed with a wife 37 weeks along…

50

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Kailash wrote:
Professor X wrote:
What makes a whole person?

Self-awareness, certainly.

If that’s true, then why is there so much debate about abortions?[/quote]

Because so many people are that irresponsible and selfish.

For more information try, “The Unseen” by Geto Boys.

51

This is just begging for some callous humor…however, is it known whether or not this is one or two different people? That’d provide the answer as to what to do.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

I am just interested in what some parents on this board would do in this situation. If your child was born with one body and two heads, would you surgically have one head removed?[/quote]

52

[quote]Mys7icaL 0n3 wrote:
I would destroy the abomination.[/quote]

Your terrible.

53

[quote]Kailash wrote:
Professor X wrote:
What makes a whole person?

Self-awareness, certainly. Though, for a newborn, regular activity of the cerbral cortex would suffice. (They aren’t quite yet able to express self-awareness, so some clinical test is necessary.)

[/quote]

If you think about it a little more deeply, you’ll find that this is a very poor definition of what makes a person. Peter Singer uses a similar definition, I believe. He would allow infanticide in a surprizing number of cases. He’s a monster.

Infants are far less self-aware than, say, a dog, fyi.

You’ll find that there’s no significant reasoned difference between a child immediately before or after birth, or even for sometime thereafter. Check out the Philip K. Dick story “The Pre-Person’s” sometime for a bit of reducto ad absurdam along these lines. The Pre-Persons - Everything2.com

A person in a coma? Asleep? Senile? Significantly mentally retarded, yet still aware? Differentiate a dog from an infant, a toddler, an adult.

There is something apart from self-awareness that makes us human persons. What you see with an infant is the potential for self-awareness and the potential to grow into an adult human.

There is a very, very dangerous slippery slope related to utilitarian arguments about whether other persons should continue to live.

54

[quote]flcroc wrote:
Yo Momma wrote:
SirPhisticated wrote:
With todays technology there’s no way a woman can give birth to a child with two heads without knowing it first. In my opinion you’re an egoistic idiot, if you don’t choose an abortion, if you know the child will be severely disabled or retarded.

I may be a cynical asshole but that’s my opinion…

Most conjoined twins are born into the third world or whose parents have no access to pre-natal care. Some parents may also be religious fundamentalists who believe every sperm is sacred and even a genetic “abomination” is precious to the Lord.

I am a mother of 17 year old identical twin boys, who are very strong and healthy. I shudder to think of even a remote possibility that this could have happened during my pregnancy, because in retrospect, I probably would abort. Every time I see conjoined twins, I get the heebie-jeebies. No. it’s not a disease, but it is the combined feelings of shock, sorrow, disgust and fascination with a touch of chills and nausea.

My feelings exactly. I feel badly when I see those shows and have to change the channel because it is real and those parents can’t just keep clicking…

This thread is not what I needed with a wife 37 weeks along…
[/quote]

I know how you feel, flcroc, because I was just there; my daughter will be 8 weeks old tomorrow. When my wife had her preliminary blood work done, her OB said the baby was a high risk for Down Syndrome. We went and had the amnio done to be 100% sure everything was in the clear, and the waiting time for the test results was, to put it mildly, tense.

I’m sure your baby will be fine, and congratulations in advance on the new addition.

55

[quote]pookie wrote:
SkyzykS wrote:
Just from this thread alone, there are so many questions that the answer seems obvious.

Leave them together. That way, all of the questions could be answered once (or if) the baby grows in to a cognitively sound adult.

Even if the baby developes with some defects, it or they could be studied through out its life. Seems like separation or removal of one of the heads would waste an extremely rare opportunity to learn a whole lot.

It’s that most of us consider them as persons, not as science projects. Hence the moral and ethical dilemmas.
[/quote]

Yea, That may have come off as a little cold and opportunistic. What I meant was that it would be interesting to see how a person or people would develope under such a rare circumstance.

The moral/ethical dilemmas are immense. How do you even refer to them? One person? Two people? Two functioning minds would equal two separate people wouldn’t it?

56

Obviously a response from a person with children is going to differ from that without . As hard as it is I couldnt understand any parents reason to abort it. I’m not religious but your child is your child no matter what.

57

[quote]Res Judicata wrote:
Kailash wrote:
Professor X wrote:
What makes a whole person?

Self-awareness, certainly. Though, for a newborn, regular activity of the cerbral cortex would suffice. (They aren’t quite yet able to express self-awareness, so some clinical test is necessary.)

If you think about it a little more deeply, you’ll find that this is a very poor definition of what makes a person. Peter Singer uses a similar definition, I believe. He would allow infanticide in a surprizing number of cases. He’s a monster.

Infants are far less self-aware than, say, a dog, fyi.

You’ll find that there’s no significant reasoned difference between a child immediately before or after birth, or even for sometime thereafter. Check out the Philip K. Dick story “The Pre-Person’s” sometime for a bit of reducto ad absurdam along these lines. The Pre-Persons - Everything2.com

A person in a coma? Asleep? Senile? Significantly mentally retarded, yet still aware? Differentiate a dog from an infant, a toddler, an adult.

There is something apart from self-awareness that makes us human persons. What you see with an infant is the potential for self-awareness and the potential to grow into an adult human.

There is a very, very dangerous slippery slope related to utilitarian arguments about whether other persons should continue to live. [/quote]

Here’s a tip: Reading just the first sentence, then writing an entire post answering it - before reading the second sentence - makes you look stupid. Especially when you quoted the second sentence:

“Though, for a newborn, regular activity of the cerbral cortex would suffice. (They aren’t quite yet able to express self-awareness, so some clinical test is necessary.)”

Therefore, we don’t have to wait for the infant to express their personhood. Just check for normal cortical activity.

Some babies are born with anencephaly or severe hydroencephaly, etc. and would live their entire lives as vegetables, basically operating on only a brain stem. They would never attain personhood, and could be euthanized or, typically, allowed to die. Quite simple.

58

[quote]Res Judicata wrote:
There is something apart from self-awareness that makes us human persons. What you see with an infant is the potential for self-awareness and the potential to grow into an adult human.
[/quote]

What about a sperm and an egg then? They all have potential. No matter what you are; pro-choice or pro-life, there are exceptions to every definition you give. There are has never been a simple solution to a complex social problem like abortion, so don’t make it seem like there is one.

Obviously we don’t have enough information to know exactly what we’d do, but it is certainly interesting to think about. We all have to remember the financial burden being put on the family and them coming to the realization that their lives will never be the same, assuming that this child lives.

Does anyone know if they could put it up for adoption? I would think that would be pretty common for something like this, but I never hear about it.

59

That’s a REALLY tough call. I don’t think anyone can honestly say what they’d do unless they were put in that situation and had all of the pertinent discussions. I know I would have to do a lot of praying for the answers.

DB

60

In many cases of severe birth defects it seems that nature would be more merciful than man, cleaning up its mistakes rather than selfishly keeping the kid alive through advanced medical intervention so it can suffer through a short and miserable life.