Twins, East Timor, Africa, Creative Britain

[Brad DeLong]

>It should be no surprise that the judges have lost sleep over the case.
>The law is a useless instrument in such a situation since nobody has any
>true rights here.  Jodie is only recognised as a human being by virtue
>of the arbitrary norm that birth is the point at which life begins. She
>has no right to life. The parents can have no right of life and death
>over their children. It may be true that 'Mary', at such a tender age,
>and with no chance of survival as a being independent of the stronger
>'Jodie', is probably not a real or legal person, and that no death would
>be caused by the separation, but it is irrelevant. Jodie has no right to
>be free of her.
>
>However, when the welfare of the parties is considered the position is
>simple and obvious. Jodie is a newborn baby who has only primitive
>feelings and no opinions. Even if she survived the operation she would
>be severely disabled. The advantages to her of her survival are at best
>doubtful. On the other hand the costs to the parents of such an
>operation are clear and unambiguous. It would offend their deeply held
>religious beliefs and leave them with an awful emotional burden to live
>with. Never was there so clear a case for applying the principle that
>the welfare of the adults should be the paramount consideration.

Am I allowed to say that neither the rights-based analysis in the 
first paragraph nor the utilitarian in the second seems to me to be 
appealing?

Brad DeLong