Q1.) From a utilitarian standpoint, the best decision would be the one in which no surgery is preformed, the child is raised as a boy, and the child makes the decision when he is older. This option is not only a better option for the child but for the parents and hospital as well. With this decision there is less cost, less time spent, lower costs, and no decision is made about the boy without his approval. If the wrong decision was made for the boy then the rest of his life could be much worse off. This option puts that choice in the boy's hands when he is ready to deal with it. That is not to say that the other option does not have its merits, it is just that this option will lead to more good than will the other.
2.) The medical team should provide the parents with as much information as possible when it comes to the gender reassignment surgery, the hormone treatment plan, the affliction of the boy, and any other relevant topics. This will help to insure that the parents are fully aware of the different outcomes with each option. With this knowledge, they will be able to pick the option that leads to the greatest utility.
Q1. Fortunately for this situation, my viewpoint stands as a utilitarian's would. The most logical decision would be to let the boy (who was BORN A BOY) grow up to be a man. The cost, time, and emotional stress the family would be put through to change him into a female seems much too drastic, especially at such a young and vulnerable age. Sex-change is not a decision that should be made by anyone but the directly affected person, even if he is a newborn. To put it simply, would you rather be known for having a small penis, or as the girl who was born a male and turned into a female? Because realistically, the decision is going to come down to answering "What will people think of my child?" and "How will my child make it in a world that is so ready to tear them down?," as sad as it is. When the boy is of age, he can make that decision for himself.
Q2. The medical team should provide enough information for both situations: if you choose to do "this" then you will have to consider "this"... In these cases it would be hard for the medical team to give the parents a strictly professional opinion, but according to a utilitarian they would likely see less "negatives" out of choosing to wait until the boy is of age. It is ultimately the parent's decision, and they would have to choose which is most beneficial to their son.
1). To follow through with the surgery and treatments at this stage of the child's life would not seem right. If we were to look at what maximizes happiness for everybody, then that should include the child in question. Since the child cannot make the decision at this moment, then the parents need to avoid the surgery and let the child make a decision about his/her sexuality later when the capability is there. Society will definitely have an impact on the decision later on, as Sam said, but for the child to have that option of choosing which sex is better for him/her is what makes it morally correct, in my opinion. And in terms of utilitarianism, the parents and the child can now be involved in determining what path to take.
2) Once again, I feel like I am reiterating what others are saying, but yes the medical team needs to offer every bit of information when it comes down to cost, consistent treatments, surgeries, stress on the child and parents, and even psychological results/opinions. This would help the parents weigh out each option as to what maximizes the amount of happiness within the family.
I think that the decision for the present that seems more conducive to the child’s long term interests would be for the parents to refuse the surgical removal of the testicles, additional surgery, and hormonal treatments. In my opinion, the best decision here is for the parents to raise their child as if there wasn’t any sexual ambiguity. When the child grows and begins asking questions and finds more of a comfort with the opposite sex, then I would say to let that child make the decision for himself; to get the surgery and hormonal treatments. I do believe, however, that the alternative – the surgery and hormonal treatments for the newborn – is a legitimate option. I cannot blame the parents for considering this idea because they only want what is best for their child, and if they were to go through with the surgery right after the baby was born, then there is that likelihood that their child will not encounter bullying and antagonizing peers. However, sex change is a HUGE decision, and really should only be made by the directly affected individual. When the boy is of age and can make the decision for himself, he should have that option and ability.
The medical team should of course inform the parents of all of the outcomes and consequences of each option that is presented to them. The outcomes and consequences should be presented in an unbiased manner though, because ultimately the decision at this point is up to the parents because the boy clearly cannot do so for himself.
I think the best decision for the baby would be to let it grow up as a boy since he was born a boy. If the parents performed the surgery now they would be taking away the choice for the child to live their life they were born with. Once the child is older he will be able to decide on how he wants to live his life and if he wants the surgery and the hormonal treatments or not. This give him the choice on what to do compared to if the parents chose for him to do the surgery as an infant.
The medical team should provide the parents with all the information on the procedure, the side effects, to stats, the accuracy, everything. The parents need to be education on what happens and what their baby's life would be like if they went through with the surgery and also if they didn't go through with it. They need to exhibit an unbiased opinion in order to give the parents the best information so they can make the best decision for their child.
From a utilitarian point of view, having the surgery would not necessarily create more good than evil. Their are obvious risks involved with the procedure itself, but more than that there is no way to tell how changing the gender of the child will affect it over time. Since he was born a boy, the utilitarian argues that he should stay a boy in order to avoid confusion later. Imagine how much stress and other negative tolls this would take on the child as they grew to find out that they were born a boy but their parents decided to change them to a girl. This would create too much "bad" compared to the "good." As with any procedure, the medical team is obligated to arm the parents with the ability to make an informed consent by telling them all the risks and benefits associated with such a procedure. They could also help schedule them with professionals that are ready to counsel the family throughout the child's life as it grows, whichever gender the parents decide to go with. I am sure that whatever decision they make they will be unsure in their ability to generate a psychologically sound plan for parenting in such a difficult circumstance.
Q1.) From a utilitarian standpoint, the best decision would be the one in which no surgery is preformed, the child is raised as a boy, and the child makes the decision when he is older. This option is not only a better option for the child but for the parents and hospital as well. With this decision there is less cost, less time spent, lower costs, and no decision is made about the boy without his approval. If the wrong decision was made for the boy then the rest of his life could be much worse off. This option puts that choice in the boy's hands when he is ready to deal with it. That is not to say that the other option does not have its merits, it is just that this option will lead to more good than will the other.
ReplyDelete2.) The medical team should provide the parents with as much information as possible when it comes to the gender reassignment surgery, the hormone treatment plan, the affliction of the boy, and any other relevant topics. This will help to insure that the parents are fully aware of the different outcomes with each option. With this knowledge, they will be able to pick the option that leads to the greatest utility.
Q1. Fortunately for this situation, my viewpoint stands as a utilitarian's would. The most logical decision would be to let the boy (who was BORN A BOY) grow up to be a man. The cost, time, and emotional stress the family would be put through to change him into a female seems much too drastic, especially at such a young and vulnerable age. Sex-change is not a decision that should be made by anyone but the directly affected person, even if he is a newborn. To put it simply, would you rather be known for having a small penis, or as the girl who was born a male and turned into a female? Because realistically, the decision is going to come down to answering "What will people think of my child?" and "How will my child make it in a world that is so ready to tear them down?," as sad as it is. When the boy is of age, he can make that decision for himself.
ReplyDeleteQ2. The medical team should provide enough information for both situations: if you choose to do "this" then you will have to consider "this"... In these cases it would be hard for the medical team to give the parents a strictly professional opinion, but according to a utilitarian they would likely see less "negatives" out of choosing to wait until the boy is of age. It is ultimately the parent's decision, and they would have to choose which is most beneficial to their son.
1). To follow through with the surgery and treatments at this stage of the child's life would not seem right. If we were to look at what maximizes happiness for everybody, then that should include the child in question. Since the child cannot make the decision at this moment, then the parents need to avoid the surgery and let the child make a decision about his/her sexuality later when the capability is there. Society will definitely have an impact on the decision later on, as Sam said, but for the child to have that option of choosing which sex is better for him/her is what makes it morally correct, in my opinion. And in terms of utilitarianism, the parents and the child can now be involved in determining what path to take.
ReplyDelete2) Once again, I feel like I am reiterating what others are saying, but yes the medical team needs to offer every bit of information when it comes down to cost, consistent treatments, surgeries, stress on the child and parents, and even psychological results/opinions. This would help the parents weigh out each option as to what maximizes the amount of happiness within the family.
I think that the decision for the present that seems more conducive to the child’s long term interests would be for the parents to refuse the surgical removal of the testicles, additional surgery, and hormonal treatments. In my opinion, the best decision here is for the parents to raise their child as if there wasn’t any sexual ambiguity. When the child grows and begins asking questions and finds more of a comfort with the opposite sex, then I would say to let that child make the decision for himself; to get the surgery and hormonal treatments.
ReplyDeleteI do believe, however, that the alternative – the surgery and hormonal treatments for the newborn – is a legitimate option. I cannot blame the parents for considering this idea because they only want what is best for their child, and if they were to go through with the surgery right after the baby was born, then there is that likelihood that their child will not encounter bullying and antagonizing peers. However, sex change is a HUGE decision, and really should only be made by the directly affected individual. When the boy is of age and can make the decision for himself, he should have that option and ability.
The medical team should of course inform the parents of all of the outcomes and consequences of each option that is presented to them. The outcomes and consequences should be presented in an unbiased manner though, because ultimately the decision at this point is up to the parents because the boy clearly cannot do so for himself.
I think the best decision for the baby would be to let it grow up as a boy since he was born a boy. If the parents performed the surgery now they would be taking away the choice for the child to live their life they were born with. Once the child is older he will be able to decide on how he wants to live his life and if he wants the surgery and the hormonal treatments or not. This give him the choice on what to do compared to if the parents chose for him to do the surgery as an infant.
ReplyDeleteThe medical team should provide the parents with all the information on the procedure, the side effects, to stats, the accuracy, everything. The parents need to be education on what happens and what their baby's life would be like if they went through with the surgery and also if they didn't go through with it. They need to exhibit an unbiased opinion in order to give the parents the best information so they can make the best decision for their child.
From a utilitarian point of view, having the surgery would not necessarily create more good than evil. Their are obvious risks involved with the procedure itself, but more than that there is no way to tell how changing the gender of the child will affect it over time. Since he was born a boy, the utilitarian argues that he should stay a boy in order to avoid confusion later. Imagine how much stress and other negative tolls this would take on the child as they grew to find out that they were born a boy but their parents decided to change them to a girl. This would create too much "bad" compared to the "good."
ReplyDeleteAs with any procedure, the medical team is obligated to arm the parents with the ability to make an informed consent by telling them all the risks and benefits associated with such a procedure. They could also help schedule them with professionals that are ready to counsel the family throughout the child's life as it grows, whichever gender the parents decide to go with. I am sure that whatever decision they make they will be unsure in their ability to generate a psychologically sound plan for parenting in such a difficult circumstance.