Ali Emmott

Intro. To Ethics

November 24, 2013

Movie Moral Dilemma

My Sister’s Keeper, the first movie based on a novel by best-selling author

Jodi Picoult asks its viewers, “Is it morally correct to do whatever it takes to save

a child's life… even if that means infringing upon the rights of another? Is it worth

trying to discover who you really are, if that quest makes you like yourself less?”

Anna Fitzgerald was conceived by means of in vitro fertilization and was

brought into the world to be a genetic match for her older sister Kate, who suffers

from acute promyelocytic leukemia, in order to keep her alive. Anna was

genetically engineered to be a perfect donor of blood, marrow and whatever else

Kate might need. The story plays out when Kate turns 13 and she goes into renal

failure. Kate’s kidneys are failing and she’ll need one of Anna’s in order to

survive.

From a utilitarian standpoint, where one favors the greatest pleasure for

the least amount of pain, that creating Anna in efforts to help her sister would

make many more people happy than it would cause pain. Devoted but strong-

willed mother Sara is in serious denial about her daughter Kate’s losing battle

with cancer and almost forgets about her other daughter’s health. Prior to Kate

getting sick again at age 13, the movie throughout goes back to the all the good,

happy and loving times the family has had and shows how much love there really

was for one another. These flash backs of family memories demonstrate that

Ali Emmott

Intro. To Ethics

November 24, 2013

giving birth to Anna brought joy into Brian and Sara Fitzgerald life and that there

was unconditional love for her.

By age 11 Anna has been poked and prodded with needles and had bone

marrow extracted twice. The likelihood of giving her kidney to Kate is terrifying,

since the operation is not without danger and it could rob Anna of the capacity to

live a normal life. Standing up to her mother, Anna decides she wants “medical

emancipation,” and approaches a lawyer, Campbell Alexander to take her case.

She does not want to live her life at risk because she only has one kidney. Anna

wants to live with her family and still loves her sister, but she wants control of her

body as any 11-year-old girl would. For a mere $700, Anna’s life savings

Alexander takes on her case, together they sue for medical privileges over

Anna’s body, for her right to decline potential hard from the procedures that

would save her sister.

Anna and Kate’s mother Sara, who’s done everything to save Kate is

outraged and does not understand Anna’s selfishness. But isn’t it rather selfish to

not think of Anna’s feelings about being chopped up against her will? Sara the

mother of the girls believes that her actions to use her daughter as the donor of

blood, cells and/or marrow for her other dying daughter to be morally and

ethically right. The films major ethical dilemma is it right to sacrifice one child for

another? In this situation a traditional ethical relativist would keep both girls alive

because in our society it would be morally right despite Kate’s readiness to die.

Ali Emmott

Intro. To Ethics

November 24, 2013

As the story is being told throughout the movie we learn that Kate is not

making progress and has two last requests. Kate knows she is dying and that

Anna’s kidney may not even help her but is and always has been thankful for

Anna. She is thankful for everything Anna has done and Anna would continue to

help but under Kate’s request she wants Anna to start living her life.

In conclusion the story completely goes with the moral philosophy of

Immanuel Kant, which identifies that a person is praised or blamed for their

actions based on the intentions with which they act. His idea is that a person’s

action should not be judged on its consequences, rather it should be judged on

his or her intentions. Anna’s intentions were not to have her sister die but to fulfill

her sisters wishes because it was evident that Kate was suffering and had fought

long enough.