Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The moral minefield of a boy's dying wish
www.dailytelegraph.news.com.au ^ | 21dec01 | LUCY CLARK

Posted on 12/21/2001 11:46:28 AM PST by LiveFree2000

The moral minefield of a boy's dying wish

21dec01
Is it right or wrong to grant a dying teenaged boy his wish to have sex? LUCY CLARK examines a modern ethical dilemma:

A 15 YEAR-OLD boy is terminally ill with cancer. He knows he doesn't have very long to live, and he has a dying wish. It is not to go to Disneyland or to meet his favourite actor, rock or sports star but it is this: he wants to make love to a woman.

But there's a problem – he's in hospital, he doesn't want to talk to his mum and dad about it, and having been sick and in and out of hospital since the age of 12, he has formed no friendships or relationships with girls from his peer group.

The boy, let's call him Jack, simply wants to experience what every testosterone-driven heterosexual teenage boy thinks about, allegedly, every 17 seconds. Sex.

So what does he do?

It sounds like a hypothetical situation, but this story is true and Jack is real. His heartbreaking story about death and desire came to light last month when the child psychologist dealing with Jack wrote a letter to the Radio National program, Life Matters, in which moral dilemmas are discussed by academics.

It's a fascinating topic for academic discussion: how does a minor and the people who care for him tread though the ethical and practical minefield to see that he gets such a wish?

And firstly, should he even be granted his wish?

While many of us might scream reflexively "Yes! Of course!", cautious ethicists may ask questions.

Is a 15 year-old, officially a child, intellectually and emotionally competent to make such a mature decision? Do the parents have a right to know? Should the woman involved be charged with the criminal offence of having sex with a minor? Should a prostitute be involved? Should the hospital staff help to organise something?

All valid questions ripe for discussion, but forget the academic debate. What happened to Jack himself?

Yesterday, the child psychologist – who wishes to remain anonymous – told The Daily Telegraph the rest of the dying boy's story.

He had become involved after a nurse tending Jack – the only person Jack took into his confidence – urged the boy to talk to him.

So Jack spoke to the child psychologist, who specifically deals with children dying of terminal diseases, and this was not the first time the psychologist had heard of such a wish from a teenage boy.

"He had been sick for quite a long period and his schooling was very disrupted, so he hadn't had many opportunities to acquire and retain friends, and his access to young women was pretty poor," said the psychologist.

"But he was very interested in young women and was experiencing that surge of testosterone that teenage boys have."

So Jack and the psychologist had a series of thorough discussions in which they went through every possible permutation of what might happen to him physically and emotionally so that he was "completely prepared" for the prospect of living out his final dream.

Jack's state of mind, he said, was sensible and mature and psychologically, totally competent. As he said: "Terminally ill kids get very wise, very quickly" and Jack had been sick for a long time.

The hospital staff who knew about Jack's wish at first wanted to help, their first reaction being "let's do a whip around and pay for a prostitute" but of course ethical and legal considerations stopped them in their tracks.

The psychologist also had canvassed members of the clergy, and found an interesting response: "It really polarised them, about half said what's your problem? And the other half said [the idea] demeans women and reduces the sexual act to being just a physical one.

"I just saw it as a legitimate request of a young man who wants to experience something that can do no harm."

The psychologist said that with Jack, he rigorously questioned what damage might be done to him as a result of fulfilling his wish, and the answer came up every time: none.

"Everyone's uncomfortable with teenage sex, period," said the psychologist. "Adolescents becoming sexual is enormously confronting, and a lot of people believe that kids shouldn't be sexual. But we are sexual from the womb to the tomb – that's my view.

"But ethics and morals aside, in children dying over a long period of time, there is often a condition we call 'skin hunger'."

This happens when a child, seriously ill and in and out of hospital and receiving medical treatment over a long period, yearns for non-clinical contact because "mostly when people touch them, it's to do something unpleasant, something that might hurt".

"So you ask," said the psychologist, "what was this young man wanting?

"Was he wanting a cuddle?"

Probably yes, but as his illness and its treatment hadn't obliterated his normal teenage urges, he also really wanted that consummate experience.

So without his parents knowing, and completely without the involvement of the hospital staff, and not – it must be stressed – on the hospital's premises, Jack "did engage in the act and it was everything he wished it to be".

"He was very, very happy and only slightly disappointed that it was over quickly."

"The act", his dying wish, was with a sex worker who was "organised by friends who thought it was the right thing to do". All precautions were taken, and the friends made sure the act was fully consensual and involved no abuse or exploitation.

As for the legal ramifications of such a case, "quite clearly the law was broken, but of the people involved, most didn't give a toss," the psychologist said.

And what of the parent's right to know about their son?

Jack simply didn't want to talk to them about it.

He loved them, but they are religious and he didn't want them to know. Anyway, what 15-year-old boy does want to talk to his parents about sex, even under normal circumstances?

There is also legal precedence for a minor of sufficient maturity and intelligence to be given confidential medical treatment but does sex with a prostitute count as treatment?

"Absolutely. It is absolutely part of therapy," said the psychologist, "Because it was what he wanted. People talk about a trip to Disneyland being therapeutic what's the difference? It was what he wanted."

So Jack got what he wanted, and last week, he finally lost his fight with the cancer.

 


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 401-420 next last
To: LiveFree2000
Post # 315: So would I.
321 posted on 12/21/2001 4:25:16 PM PST by Savage Beast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 315 | View Replies]

To: woollyone
Liberal! Remind me not to let you babysit my children!

Implying that the poster is a pedophile, makes you yet another reactionary jackass.

322 posted on 12/21/2001 4:25:22 PM PST by OWK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 318 | View Replies]

To: steve in DC
But it is a thin moral argument when the argument in favor of the request is that a purly hedonistic pleasure be provided.

This may come as a great shock, but the fact that it is pleasurable, is why people actually have sex in the first place.

323 posted on 12/21/2001 4:28:03 PM PST by OWK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 319 | View Replies]

To: garbanzo
But nothing this boy did himself is the cause of his cancer...why would a benevolent deity punish him for something Adam and Eve supposedly did?

The punishment all unsaved man will receive is precisely because of the havoc our sin wreaked upon the earth. God's order was ruined by man's sin, and things like cancer are the result of a good creation gone awry. Yes, God does punish people on earth (1Tim 5:24), but every bad thing that happens to people should not be taken as direct judgement from God (John 9:1-5; Job).

324 posted on 12/21/2001 4:28:53 PM PST by Egg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies]

To: woollyone
Liberal! LOL

I accept no tags. I think for myself. Your children were not in question until now.

Hope they are never dying of cancer and are afraid to confide in you because they are aware of your narrow minded anal indignation.

325 posted on 12/21/2001 4:29:47 PM PST by LiveFree2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 318 | View Replies]

To: Egg
But God does little to alievate suffering - why for example didn't God supernaturally cure the kid's cancer as opposed to having a moral dilemma on whether or not he should have sex?
326 posted on 12/21/2001 4:31:35 PM PST by garbanzo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 324 | View Replies]

To: LiveFree2000
The psychologist did the right thing. What right do all these Christians have to tell someone else what he should or should not be doing? The only reason it's illegal for a minor to have sex with an adult is because it could be harmful to the minor--in this case, who cares? He's dead either way.

If I were in his shoes, that's exactly what I would want, and I certainly wouldn't want a bunch of "Christians" telling me I have to wait until some arbitrary age. Christians, back in the days of Jesus, used to be married and pregnant by the time they were 15.

327 posted on 12/21/2001 4:31:41 PM PST by xm177e2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steve in DC
It is not necessarily immoral to deny a last request. It depends on a number of things, including what the request is. However it's being a purely hedonistic pleasure has nothing to do with it.
328 posted on 12/21/2001 4:32:28 PM PST by Savage Beast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 319 | View Replies]

To: OWK
Modern medicine. The automobile. Space travel. Air travel. The computer. Yeah... let's face it... reason is worthless.

These things are cheap substitutes for what man had and might have had before he rebelled against God. And no technology man might invent could bring the fulfillment that comes with a (re-established) relationship with God (Eph 3:19).

329 posted on 12/21/2001 4:35:34 PM PST by Egg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 320 | View Replies]

To: LiveFree2000
Post # 310: Well said.
330 posted on 12/21/2001 4:36:06 PM PST by Savage Beast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 310 | View Replies]

To: OWK
Doesn't this never ending argument with believers ever become tiresome with you?
331 posted on 12/21/2001 4:36:41 PM PST by freedomson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 320 | View Replies]

To: freedomson
Doesn't this never ending argument with believers ever become tiresome with you?

Shrug....

It's something to do while I'm waiting for the Maryland-Oklahoma game.

332 posted on 12/21/2001 4:38:24 PM PST by OWK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 331 | View Replies]

To: Egg
These things are cheap substitutes for what man had and might have had before he rebelled against God.

I thought man was running around naked in the woods, before he rebelled against God.

333 posted on 12/21/2001 4:39:33 PM PST by OWK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 329 | View Replies]

To: garbanzo
As a matter of fact, sex releases powerful endorphins, which are powerful pain-killers!
334 posted on 12/21/2001 4:39:46 PM PST by Savage Beast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies]

To: freedomson
"Doesn't this never ending argument with believers ever become tiresome with you?"

Someone has to keep the Taliban from overrunning the position.

335 posted on 12/21/2001 4:42:37 PM PST by LiveFree2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 331 | View Replies]

To: CCWoody
I've read all of your posts. One question: Did this boy's act glorify God?

Doing that which is good glorifies God.

What is your standard for defining what is good?

I suggest it's the Bible.

Consequently, before someone starts condemning a young boy for doing something wrong, I would like to scriptural support for the condemnation. I have yet to see any.

What this boy did is no different than what Abraham, Moses, Isaac, Jacob, Caleb, David, Solomon, etc., etc. did. Namely, partake in the pleasures of a concubine.

There is clear scriptural support condemning what he has done. The disgusting thing is that after 200 posts not a single self-righteous christian who has posted has mentioned it. Such ignorance of the scriptures is apalling.

336 posted on 12/21/2001 4:43:21 PM PST by backup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies]

To: Savage Beast, OWK
My point is that the request lacks a certain moral "gravitas".

I mean, was that young lady making an immoral choice when she denied me sex, even after I bought her dinner AND the movie?

That the child may be denied the opportunity to enjoy a fling is hardly a "moral" conundrum.

337 posted on 12/21/2001 4:46:24 PM PST by steve in DC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 328 | View Replies]

To: OWK
I have never rebelled against God, but I've done a lot of running around naked in the woods. Did I ever tell you about the time in Mount Shasta when... oops!
338 posted on 12/21/2001 4:48:29 PM PST by Savage Beast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 333 | View Replies]

To: steve in DC
I mean, was that young lady making an immoral choice when she denied me sex, even after I bought her dinner AND the movie?

I don't get the connection...

339 posted on 12/21/2001 4:48:32 PM PST by OWK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 337 | View Replies]

To: backup
If it was anywhere near as wonderful as my first sexual experience--or the second--or the third--or well... All of them! ...then, Yes! It glorified God!!!
340 posted on 12/21/2001 4:55:07 PM PST by Savage Beast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 401-420 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson