The Quality Of Life Is Best Defined As The General Well Being Of Individuals And Societies

1069 Words Apr 11th, 2016 5 Pages
The quality of life is best defined as the general well-being of individuals and societies. John A. Robertson argues that infants are persons, but believes we have no obligation to treat defective infants. Also, we have H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr. who argues that infants are not persons, and believes there is a duty not to treat them if treatment prolongs a painful life. Altogether, Robertson and Engelhardt both have different views of the quality of life one possesses.

John A. Robertson rejects the claim that infants are not persons. Robertson says, "The arguments supporting care in all circumstances are based on the view that all living creatures are sacred, contain a spark of the divine, and should be so regarded" (Robertson, p.537). With this being said, Robertson is saying all living creatures are cherished and they should be treated as such. He also states, "[H]owever, that recognizing the fetus to be a person, does not conclude the treatment issue" (Robertson, p.538). Here Robertson is saying that even if we can prove any infant is a person it does not justify their treatment issues. Robertson says, "We must therefore consider whether treatment can be withheld on grounds other than the claim that such infants are not persons" (Robertson, P. 539). Therefore, a defective infant may morally be a person, but that infant may also be withheld treatment. Also, Robertson argues that we have no obligation to treat defective newborns when the cost of doing so greatly…

Related Documents

Overtime | the marshall mathers lp | Guerreiro