I believe I found this talk so interesting because it was so debatable. It balances on a fine line between what is okay and absurd. Personally, I believe this case was handled very well and the right thing was done. All of these treatments were done out of love and care for Ashley. Her parents wanted what was best for her and chose to have such drastic changes done in order for her to have a more enjoyable life.
I appreciated Mr. Diekema's analysis and explanation of the case. He also did a good job of bringing in opposing viewpoints to the case and giving answers to these. After listening to him, I felt that it would almost be impossible to disagree with him; not because he was so persuasive, but because it looks like this case had Ashley's best interests and health concerns in mind, and as a result, the right thing was done.
I really enjoyed yesterdays lecture and greatly appreciated it!
2 comments:
As you observe, his topic was controversial. A woman was passing out leaflets denouncing him on the overpass. When a Calvin staff member asked if she had permission, she announced that she had the right to free speech. The staff member replied that, although that was so, she was on private property, and called Campus Safety. As the car pulled up, she left in something of a huff.
Funny story, Prof. Bytwerk.
Bethany, nice post. Yes, i too thought this situation was well-handled. Although there were risks, it seemed that the operations/treatments were in the best interest of Ashley. Both she and her family can benefit from the time they can spend together and the amount which the family can care for her.
Post a Comment