Not really kill him.
I think that there's a moral difference (and a legal one) between killing and letting die. And the parents' position - though perhaps understandable and admirable in its way - was simply wrong. I'm willing to believe the doctors who said that treatment was burdensome. They know about these things.

However, though I think that the doctors didn't kill him (many of my colleagues would say that killing and letting die are the same, but I disagree), I think they should. That would have been illegal, of course - but if you're willing to see someone die, then I think you should kill them as quickly as possible rather than waiting for nature to do the job. Nature, after all, has proved to be rather against the child so far...
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Sat 21 Mar 2009, 15:24, Reply)