... if her son was alive, she'd have no bearing in the decision of when/if he was going to have children, right? That'd be his choice. So why should she be granted that power after he's dead?
... I mean, if this comes to pass, the baby's going to be an orphan before it's even conceived.
No disrespect here, but I would put to you to consider why shouldn't
the deceased's mother be permitted to make this decision? Parents, as per the MSNBC article you link, Mary, are given control of their deceased children's bodies for organ donation purposes, so this would arguably be a logical extension of that. The fact is, her son is not
alive, so how does the equivalency you attempt to draw hold, exactly? Dead vs. alive is pretty much the ultimate distinction here, no?
And Etty and Mary both, I will give you a perspective to consider, as you see fit. What is the purpose of a family? Well, there are many, but in the rawest, life-and-death sense, core-level biology, the purpose of a family is to pass on life, generation after generation. There as LOTS of other purposes for families, no doubt, but strictly in your basic biology 101 sense, it's to pass on life in perpetuity as best possible.
So what is this mother is doing here, in a way an impartial judge found credible and convincing, but doing her best, in keeping with what appears to be her true and good-faith belief, to pass on her heritage and that of her son in keeping with the wishes he expressed to her, to the extent medically feasible? She's being a mother
, is she not? And will any children conceived from this effort be orphans
, since she is stating that she will raise the kid(s) as her own? Given her willingness and ability here to go to court in the way she has, going to court again in order to adopt the child(ren) would presumably be a snap for her - does anyone doubt she will?
So will such child(ren) be blessed with a living biological father? No. But will they have at least one loving, devoted parent in their biological grandmother? Yes, seems that way. Is it odd? Oh sure. But do I have a lot of respect for this mother's thoughtful, imaginative and determined effort to make something good out of a godawful situation, the loss of her son at age 21? Yes, I do.
Do I think you, either of you, in any way, have to agree? Of course not. Would I, however, ask you maybe to reflect on what drives your response to this situation? Well, I'll put it this way - what could it hurt to consider, here, that others might see this case very differently from you, and their reasons and feelings might be just as valid as yours. IOW, are any of the condemnations of this or that as "wrong" called for here?
Just sayin'. ...
Edited by Christratton2007, 09 April 2009 - 07:24 PM.