The
story of the Hilton sisters was very interesting to read because their
experience paralleled and differed to other stories of conjoined twins. In my
bioethics class last semester we read a very good book, “One of Us,” by Alice
Dreger.
In the
U.S. individualism often translates into independence and strength whereas
interdependence suggests fragility and weakness (i.e. mother and baby
relationship). So in a situation where two people—two conscious minds—are
sharing one body, it’s often portrayed as a form of entrapment, forever
dependent on one another. However, this is not the case in conjoined twins—they
too feel as though they are independent individuals.
A very
clear example of this is Abigail and Brittany Hensel who are dicephalic
conjoined twins. The girls have never required extensive medical care and are
highly encouraged to express their individuality in terms of tastes and hobbies.
They’ve learned to swim and ride a bicycle. What these girls make clear is that
conjoinment, which interrupts our concepts and structure of individuality, does
not automatically result in attenuated individual development.
There
have been many references to psychological literature in order to justify
attempts at separation. The thought is that conjoinment intolerably limited one’s
life. However, this is not the case with most conjoined twins who often reject
the risky operation since it would result in the death of one or both twins and
a drastic change in their identity which appears to be two-fold; they see
themselves as individuals but also as part of a whole.
This
contrasts the Hilton sisters where even in the newspapers their individuality
was never questions, but celebrated, even before they could speak. Their anatomy
was celebrated and exploited. Not once were they pressured to separate (at the
time the surgery would have resulted in the death of both) nor was Mary Hilton
blamed for not encouraging them to separate. The ethical implications of
separation surgeries complicated and multifaceted.
“One of
Us” also explores separation surgery where physicians sacrifice one twin in
order to save the other. Whether it be to further ones career (i.e. the surgeon’s)
or for good intentions, sacrifice surgeries are morally problematic because of
the implications for other procedures such as assisted suicide and organ
donations. One case mentioned is that of Rosie and Gracie Attard. In short,
Gracie was keeping both alive because Rosie had a heart that was not able to
sustain life. Gracie brain was also underdeveloped, which resulted in cognitive
impairments. The surgery was proposed as an attempt to save Grace’s life and if
not done, both would eventually die. The outcome of this case reveals
medicine’s thoughts on who is allowed a right to life. While the reason for the
separation was due to Rosie’s heart, it easy to speculate that Gracie was
granted a greater degree of right to life due to other reasons, namely physical
and cognitive abilities.
There
are several key issues that these sacrifice surgeries bring up. One of them is
that in the medical community, personhood appears to rely on being able bodied,
cognitively competent, and being a singleton. Seen in this way it is easy to
see why the physicians advocated so persistently for the surgery. The apparent
success of separation surgeries, such as Rosie’s case, will influence decisions
more strongly than the deaths of those being sacrificed.
No comments:
Post a Comment