Carefully read this case described below and analyze the situation in view of the general ethical principles you may consider applicable, under the perspective of the Desire Satisfaction Theory and/or the principles imposed by Morality & Religion, The Natural Law, and the Psychological Egoism.

The Father.-

The father has a serious kidney illness and needs a transplant. Donors are difficult to find so he has to wait and go through a process of dialysis which is highly traumatic. The diagnosis is that if The Father must go under a kidney transplant procedure with the risk of dying or having to be submitted to a dialysis procedure, three or four times every week, for the rest of this life. As a result of continued medical examinations performed, it was also diagnosed that The Father suffers from colon cancer of which a surgical procedure was necessary to eliminate the tumor.

The Son.-

In view of the circumstances, the son of 18 years old, steps forward with the possibility of donating his kidney to The Father. As a result, The Son confronts having to live a more controlled life, his life span reduced or submitted to serious treatment in the future considering that he will live on one kidney only.

The Doctor.-

When the transplant intervention is about to be performed, The Doctor decides to stop the procedure and informs The Father that the transplant procedure will be suspended for a period of six (6) months to monitor the progress of the cancer treatment in order to decide upon the need and justification of extracting a kidney from The Son, considering his young age, on one hand, and the limited life span of The Father, on the other.

Question:

• From your personal point of view, who is right OR who is wrong? Does The Father have a right to demand that the transplant be performed? Does The Son have any reason to resist the transplant? Is the Doctor entitled to suspend and delay the transplant?