Call Medical Hubris Boy In Bubble

In the
form of an interpretive essay of about 750 words, state your position
regarding the ethical implications of the following cases. In doing
so, provide alternative ethical perspectives and then argue for the
one you think best. Avoid emotional statements and state reasons
for the position you take.

“”THE
BOY IN THE BUBBLE” DILEMMA

In 1971, David Vetter was
born with a medical condition known as SCID, an immune deficiency
that is life threatening if the individual is exposed to even the
most common germs. His story is one that raises a wide array of
ethical questions.

Having watched the story
of this boy, some will question what they call “medical hubris.”
Hubris is generally understood as a form of extreme
arrogance/pride. Was the medical community at the time motivated
by some sort of self-interest, “overstepping the bounds of our
knowledge” as one person puts it? Was the medical community
genuinely out to find a cure for this problem? Was there an
exorbitant interest in seeing “how far we can go” in treating
medical problems with little or no regard for the “human factor?”
Was there a genuine concern for a human life; a commitment to
protect, save and provide as high a quality of life for one single
individual as was humanly possible? Were the doctors and researchers
motivated by a kind of detached medical and professional impulse to
“solve a problem” or by a fundamental concern for a person and
his family?

In the course of his
treatment, was “too much hope” given to David Vetter and his
family?” Were they misled in any way? David’s family faced the
choice of removing him from his “bubble” isolator [certain death]
or allowing him to remain within. One doctor spoke of taking him out
to “get this over with.” Was David a patient or simply a
research subject, a guinea pig? Did these roles become confused?

An ethical question
arises if and when David, as he ages, says: “I’ve had
enough…I’m going out, stand aside!” Some spoke of this
treatment as a “failed experiment.” Was this a medical
success story? Was it a failed experiment? Did this boy experience a
human life? How would Kant regard the treatment of David Vetter? Once
the decision was made and the child was placed in the isolator, there
was a commitment to “stay with it.” We are told that the main
medical professionals who were taking care of David eventually left
the hospital.

ANALYZE THIS CASE
FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE ETHICAL MODELS WE DISCUSSED IN CLASS…THE
UTILITARIAN PERSPECTIVE AND THE POINT OF VIEW OF A KANTIAN
DEONTOLOGIST. IN ADDITION TO THESE, INTRODUCE ANY OTHER ETHICAL
CONSIDERATIONS RELEVANT TO THE CASE.

PLEASE NOTE: THIS MUST BE DONE IN AN ETHICAL SENSE. UTILIATARIAN PERSPECTIVE AND POINT OF VIEW OF KANTIAN DEONTOLOGIST. ALSO, NSWER IF YOU BELIEVE THE PARENTS WERE ETHICAL, AS WELL AS IF THE DOCTORS WERE ETHICAL. THIS IS A RATIONAL ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAY, NOT OPINION.