"Should Selecting Saviour Siblings be Banned" Rhetorical Precis

In "Should Selecting Saviour Siblings be Banned?" (2004) S. Sheldon asserts that parents are using these saviour siblings as a means to their own ends. The writer soon suggests that all humans use other humans as a mean to their own ends. A blood transfusion is a perfect example of this, however, quite different than creating a new human to be a saviour to a brother/sister. The difference between a simple blood transfusion and a saviour sibling is that blood donations are given by individuals who are willing to donate blood. Saviour siblings are created for only one purpose and that is to save the other siblings life. Sheldon has a very strong opinion about creating children in the name of saving a different child stating "It is totally unethical. You are not creating a child for itself." and "The trouble really is that this child as it grows up has been brought into the world because it is a commodiy." Sheldon's tone is very concerned by stating that these type of children suffer both physical harm from the use of PGD and psychological harm. The author keeps in mind his readers by going in depth about each topic of the article such as outlining the welfare of a child, and the slippery slope of designing such babies.

REFERENCES

Sheldon S. "Should Selecting Saviour Siblings Be Banned?" Journal of Medical Ethics. Vol. 30 No. 6 (Dec., 2004): 533-37. Print.