Joseph and Chrissy Rivera were devastated last month when they were told that
their three-year-old little girl Amelia was ineligible to receive a kidney
transplant.
Kidney transplants are rare, especially in children, but that was not why
this little girl was being denied help. Amelia was being denied
a transplant because she suffers from Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome, a rare
genetic disorder that has left her with mental disabilities. Her doctors said
her quality of life was not
adequate to justify a kidney transplant. A hospital social worker explained
that the little girl was better off anyway because she would not be able to take
care of herself in the future when her parents passed away.
Amelia’s story has prompted a public outcry as more than 37,000 people have
signed an online petition to urge the hospital involved to reconsider. In the
face of massive public pressure, the Philadelphia hospital has now relented and
is allowing the family to go through a review process, although they have yet to
confirm whether Amelia will be approved for a transplant.
This story is far from unique, as an ever-increasing number of medical
practitioners use a “quality of life” calculus in determining how they will and
will not treat their patients. If the patient’s “quality of life” is deemed
sufficiently low, they will be given more limited treatment options or, in some
cases, deprived of care altogether. Given the financial cost and burden to the
system, the argument goes, theirs is in not a life worth saving.
This is no small matter, as it represents the triumph of Darwinian ethics
over Biblical ethics of life. According to Darwinism, man is not made in the
image of God and neither is life sacred. Instead, evolution views man as one
among many anomalies in the evolutionary process — a selfish animal who only
thinks himself superior to others in the animal kingdom.
What is the result of this denial of God’s Word? Darwin stated it succinctly:
“The survival of the fittest”; the weak and infirm should be left to die.
The doctors’ response to Amelia is textbook Darwinism. Instead of recognizing
her as a little girl made in the image of God and using their skills and
knowledge to improve her health, the doctors involved have deemed her not fit to
survive due to her mental disabilities.
The ethical implications of Darwinism are serious, and we as Christians must
be prepared to address them with clarity and conviction, as Vision Forum does in
our Bioethics
of Life DVD Collection.
Where the curtain falls on these issues — as the case of little Amelia shows
— means life or death for the weak
Recent Comments