Posted on 12/21/2001 11:46:28 AM PST by LiveFree2000
The moral minefield of a boy's dying wish 21dec01 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.
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.
I would be afraid to have intercourse and enjoy it with my own wife, except of course for pro-creation, if I shared their attitude about sex. I'll bet those who condemn this dying teen-ager for just once, in his whole life, experiencing the God given pleasure of intercourse, get down on their trembling sweaty knees and beg forgiveness after every panting, gasping, lustful, session of abandoned, slobbering, satisfactory sexual intercourse-hearing only the master's words of forgiveness and missing the rest of the sentence-"there is nothing to forgive, that is my gift to you."
We don't know how much God does to alleviate suffering--I'm sure we'd be quite surprised if we did. And we hardly ever know why certain people are afflicted with particular maladies. Sin is going to strike people down, and people are going to suffer. I suppose God could go around cleaning up every minute result of man's sin, but He's told us exactly how He's going to solve the problem--separate the wheat from the chaff and burn the earth clean. In the meantime, God may choose to fully heal some and not others. I can only speculate as to why on a given circumstance. I know this: if we trust God, our afflictions will always have a purpose. It would be a shame for our suffering to be in vain.
Yes, it is. It is cruel and immoral to deny his wish if it is possible to grant it.
Didn't realize there were so many virgins at FreeRepublic and sinless people. Got to love those glasshouses
Thanks :)
No problem
I believe that there is little in the failure or refusal to grant the request that might rise to the level of a "moral dilema".
I was stretching, I will grant you, to draw equivalence between his request and a request I might have made in the expectation of achieving the same gratification.
I am just not that eager to condemn those outside the faith for being human, even though we look at things from a beyond human standpoint, are we to judge those outside the faith? no? Then let's try not do that brother, those outside are God's business, all we do is sow the seeds, it is God that water's, grows, and reaps the harvest. Our Lord is full of tender mercies, not willing that any should perish, this is what I think on in these situations. They did what they thought was best for the boy in their understanding, they loved him. If they were Christian we would be right to judge and say this was wrong, but were they? Isn't it better to leave it to God to judge it and them?
It's amazing just how much man assumes God owes us--and I do it myself to be sure. But my, my--don't we demand alot from God. After all, just who is the created and here? And we the created demand that all servitude be carried out by God, the creator. God blesses us daily, yet do we thank Him daily? Every breath of air is a gift from God to men, many of whom hate Him. He would instruct us on how to live, yet we ignore Him and curse His name when things don't go the way we'd like them to.
Find a Bible and crack it open to Job chapter 38. Read it until the end of the book if you dare.
Common sense will get you nowhere on this thread, Stewart. I agree with you that "god" should go to hell for his (?) cruelty, though.
It's always amusing to see Christians on the attack when sex and the bible are the red meat thrown before them.
Even though you are a "newbie", don't let them run you off. Atheism amongst Freepers is unusual, but it seems to be permitted. After all, this purports to be a forum for the discussion of public policy issues, but religion, like sports, music, movies and other off-topic themes are quite prevalent. I guess we need these distractions as relief from the enervating angst produced by our discovery of the breadth and depth of the threat we face from a government running amuck.
Simply put, it was not the Nurse's decision to make, it was not the Phsycs decision to make ... it was not the CHILD'S DECISION to make.
The legal, moral and IMHO God appointed stewards of that boy were his parents. Going around them is the height of immorality and utterly wrong. Particularly on his death bed.
What a bunch of selfish, amoral, irresponsible bunch of interfering and social structuring idiots these people were and how DARE they interject themselves between this boy and those who truly loved him and had concern for his immediate and eternal welfare.
Shame on them and may the full legal consequences of their actions be visited upon them and may a heavenly tribunal expose their souls and their conscience to the ill deed they have done in the hopes they will repent.
... I'm sorry ... I'm rambling ... but this is a sickening height of presumption of a group of people, so called "professionals in society gone amuk IMHO.
I am amazed, astonished and unbelievably disappointed that something like this would/could happen at an hour when that boy needed good moral council as opposed to this garbage.
Maybe none physically, but spiritually may be another story, depending on what the kid's religious precepts were?
The real problem is, we got a lot of Pharisees here, who mistakenly think they are Christians.
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.