VIEW OF THE 'JODIE AND MARY' JUDGEMENT I am very concerned about this judgement and how this may impact of the life of a disabled baby if born as one of a conjoined, identical or non identical twins. In the Judges summary they concluded that the doctors could carry out the operation to defend 'Jodie' from 'Mary' harming her. Judges say "...I see no difference in essence between that resort to self-defence and the doctors’ coming to 'Jodie’s' defence and removing the threat of fatal harm to her presented by 'Mary’s' draining her life blood." Now do doctors have permission to kill the perceived weaker twin when the perceived stronger twin’s "normal" development is at risk? It’s bad enough that this happens if the twins who are born like 'Jodie and Mary' but what next? Does this now mean if a similar situation occurs in the womb that doctors are able to go to court so that they can force the mother to have an abortion in order to increase the survival of the stronger twin and aid "normal" development if the weaker twin is stopping the stronger twin from receiving enough nutrition in the womb? This is a definite concern as with 'Jodie and Mary' where their brain activity was being assessed before, during and after their births and this may be used increasingly in the future to predict the future of both conjoined and non-conjoined twins. "The feeling from the team is that Jodie’s behaviour and anatomical studies, ultrasound scans and such like suggests that she has a normal brain, which is expected to function normally and of normal intelligence insofar as one can tell this point in time... We are told at three weeks of age she showed: "normal reaction and normal development as expected for a child of her age and gestation." The court has legitimately allowed "child" developmental tests with preconceived physical, sensory, intellectual and emotional norms to determine which child shall or shall not live. Both Mary and Jodie’s development have been compared to what a non disabled baby ought to do (preferably unassisted). The "selected" child who will be allowed to live will be the one who most conforms to the expectations of non disabled children. The judges say "The best interests of the twins is to give the chance of life to the child whose actual bodily condition is capable of accepting the chance to her advantage even if that has to be at the cost of the sacrifice to a life which is so unnaturally supported" This would mean that embryos and babies would be pitched against each other and the one, which is perceived to be the fittest would be selected for life. So what will happen to the perceived weaker twin other than left to die? "The unique and the crucial feature of the case is that the twins (Jodie and Mary) share a common aorta." If the twins share the same main blood archery then wouldn’t it be in effect that Mary will be forced to give some of her bodily parts to Jodie? Additionally it can not be ruled out that Mary will not be forced to denote some of her skin to cover up Jodie’s surgical wound after the operation has been completed. The courts may be in a position now and in the future to force the parents to give their dead baby’s organs to the surviving twin as part of the "ordered" medical procedure. It is horrifying to believe that the weaker twin may be used as the spare body parts in order to re-construct a "normal" body for the surviving twin. So far it has been reported that £2 million has been spent on this case where even Jodie isn’t guaranteed survival after the operation. This £2 million could have been better spent with exploring more ways on how Mary may be kept alive. I am not convinced that there has been a real attempt of finding out how long Mary could be kept alive on the artificial heart and lung machine until she grows large enough to increase her chances of getting an appropriate transplant. Secondly is Mary on the transplant list and how much effort is being made to find an appropriate set of lungs and heart for her? Or was this court case being used just to give permission for the doctors to "positively" kill off Mary and other children like her who may be perceived as being so intellectually impaired that everyone thinks they would be better off being dead? EUGENICS LEGALISED - YOU BET. "Chong Lih Ying was only four weeks old when she received the living limb from her sister, who doctors said had no hope of survival after being born with a severe brain abnormality. Chong was born with a deformed left arm and no hand. Dr Anton Pathmanathan said The fact the donor was her identical twin with the same blood group and cell make-up means the transplant should be a complete success" *1 If for example Chong’s parents refused to go ahead with the transplant would the court have the power to permit the use of the weaker twin’s organs for transplantation as part of the medical treatment? This can’t be ruled out with 'Jodie and Mary' where it can not be totally ruled out if some of Mary’s skin may be needed to cover the separation would even though both of them have their own organs. *1 Baby girl given the arm of her dying twin by Richard Shears - (Daily Mail June 12 page 34) by Simone Aspis, People 1st. |