Analysis of My Sister’s Keepers: A Saviour Sibling

The film “My Sister’s Keepers” poses a moral dilemma concerning the predestined life of a girl who was conceived to save her sister. Genetically engineered as a marrow donor for her gravely ill sister, Anna has undergone countless surgeries in her short life. Anna sues her parents, Sarah and Brian, for medical emancipation. She undergoes a legal sue to prevent a kidney surgery, which she’ll be affected not being able to lead a normal life. The whole family accepts Anna’s choice except the mother.

Though their older daughter's life has no doubt been prolonged, Kate becomes weary of being ill her whole life. It is later revealed that Kate asked Anna to sue for emancipation, because she believes that she will die anyways. A scene from the film “My Sister’s Keepers” will be thoroughly analyzed by applying the kantian theory.

The film “My Sister’s Keeper” shows how unfair it is to create a new living being to be a donor for an existing sick child. Anna’s parents convinced themselves that it is morally licit to create a child whose body would be available to serve the medical needs of their older daughter. Kantian ethics respects the dignity and rationality of all people, where you must always be, “ Treating people as ends, not as mere means”(Kessler 115). The formal principle of duty in Kant’s theory states, “An action done from duty derives its moral worth, not from the purpose which is to be attained by it, but from the maxim that is attained by it”(Kessler 118). Anna was genetically engineered as a perfect donor for Kate, who was suffering from leukemia and kidney failure.

According to a researcher from Psychology Today, a child created to serve as a donor for an existing child is called a “savior sibling” (Jesse Reynolds). Throughout Anna’s life, her existence was defined by her ability to save her sister’s life. Her parents focused on their terminally ill daughter, neglecting Anna’s well being and how the invasive medical procedures could affect her. Sarah’s actions depicts Kant’s theory, “For its motivation lacks moral content, namely, the actions are not performed from the motive of duty” (Kessler 117). Sarah was blinded by the fear of losing her older daughter that she acted upon her own interests.

Furthermore, the conflict of Anna having to donate a kidney suggests the main moral dilemma of how Sarah and Brian should have balanced their children’s needs. In the film “My Sister’s Keepers,” Sarah claims that obligating Anna to the procedures is not as grave as, “Putting your child in the ground”(29:57). Kantian ethics tests motives and principles, reflecting on how an action takes place while determining its morality. Meaning that an individual will do the right thing regardless of the circumstances. Viewing how the procedure could restrain Anna from having a normal life, Kate as well refuses to get a transplant. However, Sarah would rather have a living child then to prioritize her other daughter’s physical well being. The mother is coercing them into an action they do not want to do, “Treating them as mere means and not as ends in themselves”(Kessler 115).

In My Sister's Keeper moral dilemma extends when it is revealed that Kate no longer wants to keep fighting. During the trial, the mother discovers her dying daughter’s wishes of accepting death. Dismayed by the truth, she refuses, “That’s not true, Kate would have told me”(25:46). What would morally right is to carry on Kate’s decision of dying peacefully, instead of letting her suffer through treatments that may not be effective. On Kant’s view, freedom is important because, “Moral appraisal presupposes that we are free in the sense that we have the ability to do otherwise”(Michael Rohlf). Sarah’s decisions confined the freedom of her children to an extend that benefited the family’s interest. The mother did not realize the kind of pain she was putting her daughters through.

Differing from Kantian ethics, a believer of utilitarianism would consider this ethical dilemma morally right. From a utilitarian point of view, conceiving Anna as a donor for Kate is right if it meant to keep her alive. Ultimately, people make decisions not based on ethics but on personal interests.. Mill’s utilitarian theory maintains that, “What makes an action right are its consequences”(Kessler 121). The theory focuses on the amount of pleasure that might result from a course of action, “If the consequences are good, then the action is right”(Kessler 121). As Sarah is questioned on the stand during the trial, she states that Anna’s situation has been taken far but, “I have to think about my entire family”(30:29). Due to the circumstances, it is morally justifiable to use Anna as a donor for the benefit of her older sister using the utilitarian ethical theory. The film “My Sister’s Keepers” may display a variety of utilitarianism principles, nevertheless, kantianism ethics appear to rationalize the moral worth of their actions.

Overall, it is not acceptable to submit a child through a succession of invasive procedures in order to to help a sibling. Anna was not given a choice neither granted permission to be a living donor. Not to forget, her older sister has made peace with her decision of dying. The motive of duty principle explains, “To ensure one’s own happiness is a duty, at least indirectly; for discontent with one’s condition, under pressure of many anxieties and amidst unsatisfied desires, might easily become a great temptation to transgression of duty”(Kessler 118). The mother was reluctant on losing her daughter, and could not accept the fact she was dying. Therefore, Sarah was determined to keep her daughter alive at the expense of her younger child. Lastly, the bond between the siblings is a reliable barrier against moral excesses and medical abuses. Kate was aware that her condition was deteriorating, and Anna deserved to enjoy her life without being concerned for her. This ethical dilemma was based on the problems of a family struggling to preserve the life of a member, disregarding the physical wellness of another. “My Sister’s Keepers” thoroughly exhibits the interpretation of how people should be treated as ends, not as mere means.