INTERVENTION? By: Nathan Lowe

The following was written for my writing class in Fall Semester 2008.
Written By. Nathan Lowe

I have decided to discuss the subject of medical intervention. Is it beneficial or detrimental to the Human Race as a whole?

At first glance this subject would appear to be a no-brainer. How is it possible to even consider not intervening to save the life of an infant. We should obviously do what ever we can to save that life.....or should we?

To begin I will assume the theory of evolution is correct as opposed to the belief in creation. Evolution would appear to have more empirical evidence to support it as the method by which life has risen to its current state on the face of this planet. The premise suggests that through countless generations and subtle mutations throughout the history of Earth countless variations of life have existed and faded into extinction. Each cycle creating a genetically superior form than what was before.

In our society we often times will intervene to save a life that could not sustain itself without intervention. Hypothetically speaking, Jessica is pregnant for the 4th time. None of her children have gone to term and none of them have survived. In this pregnancy her pediatrician Dr. Smith has gone to great lengths to extend her pregnancy. She has been on strict bed rest since she was found to be pregnant. Many therapies have been used to reduce her risk of miscarriage. Hormonal therapy, to reduce her chance of early labor, immunal therapy to reduce the risk of an autoimmune response that could lead to miscarriage or death of the fetus.

In her 5th month she goes into labor and try as they might to stop the labor it continues and the infant is born. The infant has no immunity to speak of. It requires life support immediately and it is necessary to keep it in the Newborn ICU for the first 3 months of its life.

When all is said and done the infant survives, is named Gillian, after her grandmother, and grows to be beautiful young woman. She has had several bouts with illness and is not generally healthy, but she survived. Job well done right?

This is the crux of the problem. Evolution has spent millions, even billions of years sorting out the forms of life that didn't “cut the mustard”. Is it proper for us to work so hard to undo this process? Is it not the case, that every time extraordinary means are used to save a child that would not survive, without our present level of technology, we are in fact weakening the Human Race as a whole?

From this day forward all the descendants of Gillian and her mother will likely be predisposed to weak children that are likely not equipped to survive without the crutch of technology. And with every passing generation that weakness will, theoretically, spread and weaken a steadily growing number of the Human population.

In poor starving nations. It is quite common to leave a weak child for dead. The community as a whole cannot spare the resources in food and water for a child that will likely not survive anyway. The resources must be used where they can do the most good for the community as a whole. If that child manages to survive then it has proven itself worthy of life. It has proven that it has the genetic ability to survive under very harsh conditions and the community is genetically stronger because of it.

In nature the runt of the litter is unable to muscle its way over the larger siblings to feed and will often perish from starvation.

Natural selection is a harsh and unforgiving force. It will not show mercy to the weak because it is not in the best interest of the species to become weaker over time. Natural selection's objectives are quite clear. “Find a way to strengthen life, make it more robust.”

So, from a purely survivalist point of view any form of intervention on behalf of a weak individual is counter productive. It will weaken the whole of its species and will decrease the species' survivability.

However, we are not mindless animals. A precious part of our humanity is defined by the mercy we show to the weak and less fortunate. We are a species driven by factors that are beyond the scope of mere survival. We think, we empathize, we rationalize, we form emotional bonds with one another. In fact we are more likely to form a deep bond to those that are dependent. Our bonds with our children, go far beyond the scope of having just another mouth to feed. They are an extension of ourselves. A way for us to leave some part of us behind long after we are dead and gone. They are personifications of possibility and at that early stage of life their possibilities are endless. We have no way to measure the worth of an individual so early in their lives.

We consider the previous scenario, involving starving nations and abandoned children, to be tragic. We feel a great need to find some way to help them be able to keep those children that have a rough start. It would take a very inhuman individual to truly say to Jessica, “Your infant is not worth saving.” or “You should not have children, they will become to great a liability.” I believe that no “Human” would even have the capacity to say such a thing.

My first wife, Sarah's, family had a history of infant deaths. They were all unexplained until my son, Anthony, was born. He was born missing one kidney all together, and the other was barely capable of draining fluid from his system.

The doctor had to tell us, when Anthony was just days old, that he would likely not survive. We went home and discussed our options. Would we keep him in the hospital until he died or bring him home? We decided we would prefer to have him home for those few weeks until he died.

The doctor sent us home with some special formula that would create a minimal amount of toxins as it was processed by his body. This would theoretically keep him alive a bit longer.

Well time passed, one month, two months, three. He was doing well. He got through the toughest part and we were able to, at last, release the anxiety we had been carrying with us. We started to look ahead and began preparing for an eventual kidney transplant.

By the time Anthony was 3 years old I was able to give him one of my kidneys. He is still doing well and is now 14 years old.

My experience with Anthony is actually what prompted me to consider this issue. Once his condition had been diagnosed as Brachio-Otto-Renal Syndrome. We began to research my wife's family history. In the course of that research we saw an extreme number of infant deaths. Far more than could be explained statistically. The pattern continued for, several generations in her family.

There were certain physical characteristics of Sarah's Father, Uncle, and Grandfather that seemed to be passed from one generation to the next. They all have floppy ears. Andrew and Anthony both had floppy ears and Andrew also had small holes over the lymph nodes in his neck.

Anthony, and his brother Andrew, will both have to carefully way the risks of attempting to have children throughout their adult lives. They will bear the burden of whether they want to propagate and spread this defect to their own children and, potentially, grandchildren.

Society as a whole will at some point have to consider this issue. As our population continues to increase exponentially and resources begin to be taxed worldwide in the same way they are in underdeveloped nations, we will be forced to consider how those resources are used very carefully.

Though it seems unthinkable now to tell Jessica that she should not have children, and even more unthinkable to do nothing to save the life of the child she already has. At some point in the future it will be an issue that is unavoidable.

I hope we can find a way to both survive and remain “Human”, but when it becomes an issue will we have a way to deal with it? Will we choose Humanity or survival. No one can say. I could never say, “Let my child die.” but I would not expect the same response from society as a whole if the situation were more dire.

Intervention? by Nathan L. Lowe is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Based on a work at nathan-lowe.blogspot.com.