@mumsthewordThere is one huge ethical dilemma for that ‘science’...

@mumstheword

There is one huge ethical dilemma for that ‘science’ to be ever looked at. Doctors take a hippocratic oath, to act only within ethical boundaries more or less, and mostly to uphold the sanctity of life. Scientists linked only to the medical field by way of research and scientific advancement are not as such tied to the Hippocratic oath, however they would bear a professional ethical duty to their science to act in appropriate ways in a similar manner. All human life is considered precious according to this ethos, regardless of whether we as a society don’t value someone’s life equally if that person has forfeited that right according to the standards we hold, either as a collective, or indeed as an individual according to our own moral compass.

Therefore, to venture down that path, it probably and ethically would be looked upon as treating those on ‘death row’ as lab rats, regardless of the fact the patient wishes to do so in order to aid science, whether to alleviate themselves of some guilt they may feel, or to merely prolong their own life in a vain last ditch hope that they may somehow avoid ‘death row’.

The saying ‘slippery slope’ springs to mind. I am sure though it is something many out there would think about and ponder the benefits. I don’t hold the ability to weigh the moral ins and outs of this one. I see Dr Frankenstein tapping his head in amazement and delight right now.