View Single Post
Old November 11 2008, 10:58 AM   #317
Fleet Captain
Location: Sector 001
Re: Star Trek: Destiny: Gods of Night - SPOILER Thread

JD wrote: View Post
Claudia wrote: View Post
Hm, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. IMO a doctor's first duty is to present the truth, make his/her recommendation - and then support the patient in whatever he/she decides, even if the doctor doesn't agree. And that last point is where Ree ultimately failed horribly.
I don't mean to come across as an ass, but IMO the third part isn't really an absolute. Hell, I know that if I wouldn't want my doctor to automatically support me in whatever I decide. If the doctor thinks I'm being an idiot, I'd want them to tell me.
Of course, that's included in the third part... even going as far as refering the patient to another doctor if you *can't* support his/her decisions. Support's definitely not the same as 100% agreement.

As for the Deanna debate, I think part of the problem is that this is a lot more complicated than should she or shouldn't she get an abortion. The most important part of this is the fact that Deanna WILL DIE if she doesn't get the abortion, so it's not really a matter of the baby. As for the baby, as far as they know there is nothing that can be done for it, so to Vale and Ree who have no connection to it, it is pretty much a non-issue, and this is where the problems start, because to Deanna it is.
Yes, exactly. And how much harder would the choice (and discussion) have been if there had been even the remotest chance that the baby could be born alive (even if maybe with defects)...

Christopher wrote: View Post
In humans, an embryo doesn't even enter the fetal stage until 11 weeks into the pregnancy[...]
Er... I think you're wrong on that one. Once an embryo developed the beginnings of all the major organ systems it's called fetus - and that happens at around 8-9 weeks into the pregnancy...

But of course, it could be that in the US the definition of embryonal and fetal stages differ...

David Mack wrote:
First, Ree recommends the hysterectomy at least in part to prevent the risk of "future oncological complications" -- in other words, he believes that Troi's prolonged Eichner radiation exposure has put her at a significantly elevated risk for ovarian cancer.
Sorry, my mistake, I forgot the risk for ovarian cancer... but while that might warrant a removal of the ovaries, it still doesn't mean the womb has to go as well. Therefore, he should have "merely" suggested an ovarectomy but not a hysterectomy since Troi doesn't have cancer yet.

BTW, David, thanks for even toeing that fine line of abortion, pro-life/pro-choice etc. While I'd have loved to see this situation go even further (see above in this post), I appreciate that such a serious topic is brought up at all - that not every miracle of life is demystified, so to speak, in the 24th century, but that people still have to face the same, sometimes awful, decisions like we do.
"You're my superior officer. You are also my friend. I have been and always shall be yours." (Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan)
Claudia is offline   Reply With Quote