A Page From The Family Doctor's Journal




In all my years as a doctor, this is my first time seeing such a case as the Whitakers. Charlie Whitaker suffers from a rare disorder that prevents his body from producing red blood cells. To sustain Charlie’s life, daily medications, frequent blood transfusions and close medical care are needed. As the family doctor of the Whitaker family, it is indeed extremely painful to have to watch Charlie grow up battling this disease, and I know that his parents are also heartbroken that Charlie cannot enjoy life to the fullest unless he is cured of the disease. A way to solve this dilemma is to use in-vitro fertilization to have another child, but the embryo would first be screened to see if it was able to donate blood-making cells to save Charlie. However, The Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority rejected the Whitakers request as they felt that it was not right to create a human life with the intent to save another life.

Personally, I disagree with The Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority’s rejection of the request of the Whitaker family. Firstly, as a doctor, my main purpose is to save and cure lives. If Charlie can be cured of his disease with blood making cells donated from a sibling conceived with the cells to save him, wouldn’t that be a god send? By creating another life to save a life, it would result in two healthy lives and no deaths compared to a possibility of a death and thus no lives. Thus, I have no doubt that we would all choose the former as our choice.

With blood making cells from a sibling, Charlie would be spared a lifetime of blood transfusions, daily medical treatment and may even prevent an early death. If the rare disease could be cured, then why not go ahead and utilize the cure? No one would like to be saddled with a disease that gives them so much pain and suffering and prevents them from living life to the fullest. Yes, some people may feel that selectively choosing an embryo just for the sake of saving another's life is unacceptable, as the parents would not treasure the child. However, that kind of thinking may not exactly be the Whitakers motive. Instead, detractors should trying to stand in their shoes and try to understand the dilemma they are facing. I feel that instead of looking on the negative aspect of something, one should look on the positive side, because that is what life is all about, living life to the fullest with a positive outlook.

In the event that the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority decided to accept the request of the Whitakers, I would give the Whitakers the go ahead with the in-vitro fertilization treatment but on the condition that the child conceived out of the IVF treatment should be showered with the same amount of love, care, devotion and security from his or her parents. Also, the child conceived should be constantly reminded that his or her existence is not only to save Charlie, but that he or she is extremely loved by the Whitakers. Counseling would also help the child to know that he or she is extremely important and invaluable.

With a new child born to save Charlie, I’m sure that the Whitakers would not only be able to live a meaningful and healthy life but would also be greatly overjoyed with a new child to shower their love and care on. You can see how much the Whitakers love Charlie, even going all the way out to find an embryo with the most blood-making cells to donate just to save Charlie. Therefore from the evidence of their actions, I’m sure that they’ll love and cherish their second child just as much as they love Charlie.

Instead of saying that the Whitakers only want for a child is to create a life to save another life, I feel that this would be more appropriate for their cause.

“A life created to save, and be loved”

Here’s wishing them all the best.

Posted by Anonymous @ |2:06 AM|