Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten wrote:
>
>> Ok, and I am just pointing that ==maybe== using numbers
>> in the subject of human life may have hidden costs that
>> should be computed. Namely: that by using numbers in
>> this subject the society may become more callous.
>
> I do have one problem with this. Let's take two oposite and
> hypothetical cases:
>
> Subject A: A very wealthy old person needing a very complicated and
> expensive treatment to live maybe 1 or 2 years longer, gets this
> treatment because this person can pay for it. So a lot of resources
> are put into this person because of his/her money. Resources that
> cannot be used elsewhere.
> Subject B: A child needs a simple treatment that will result in a
> perfectly normal lifespan for this child that could die otherwise, but
> won't get that treatment because the no one can pay for it.
>
> And now please explain to me ethics and cost again in relation to
> death....
>
What do you propose? That the g*vernment should decide, and
take the money away from Subject A so that Subject B survives?
IMHO, this is the worse solution for the long run, because
a society that permits those kinds of decision is
giving the g*vernment the power to decide on Life and Death.
Worse: you let the g*vernment declare that some lives [for
example, an old man's final 2 years of life] have a lesser
value than other lives.
The next step might be letting the g*vernment mass-sterilize
individuals that carry bad genes, or place an upper limit
to the age of the citizens, etc
Alberto Monteiro
