Chapter 6:
The Dilemma of Impaired Infants
Multiple Choice Questions
1) Why do some neonatologists consider making extraordinary efforts to resuscitate low birth
weight infants to be an unacceptable option?
a) The infants never survive.
b) Such efforts are very costly.
c) Such efforts are illegal.
d) The outcomes of such efforts are likely to be grim.
2) Which moral view might support the position that the costs of saving an impaired infant
would outweigh the benefits of doing this, and so the infant should not be saved?
a) Kantian ethics
b) Ross’s theory
c) Utilitarianism
d) Rawls’s theory
3) Which of the following terms describes an impairment in a child that occurs during the
development process and that is not caused by a defect in a gene or any genetic damage?
a) congenital error
b) genetic error
c) Hallopeau-Siemens disorder
d) Down syndrome
4) Which moral view holds that even the most impaired newborn is a human person?
a) Utilitarianism
b) Ross’s theory
c) Rawls’s theory
d) Natural law
5) Which moral view would deny that a lack of rational autonomy justifies depriving impaired
infants of a chance to claim life, bodily integrity, and social affiliation?
a) Utilitarianism
b) Rawls’s theory
c) Natural law
d) The capabilities approach
6) Which moral view could hold that, although we have a prima facie duty to save the life of an
impaired infant, our actual duty is to allow him to die?
a) Utilitarianism
b) Rawls’s theory
c) Ross’s theory
d) None of these choices
7) Which moral view holds that it is morally wrong to will our own death, as this involves a
self-defeating maxim?
a) Utilitarianism
b) Rawls’s theory
c) Kantian ethics
d) Natural law
8) Which of the following are required by the Groningen Protocol for actively euthanizing
impaired infants?
a) The diagnosis and prognosis must be certain.
b) The infant must be experiencing hopeless and unbearable suffering.
c) At least one independent physician must confirm that the conditions are met.
d) All of these choices
9) What does “the Ashley Treatment” involve?
a) Surgery to remove the uterus
b) Surgery to remove breast buds
c) Hormone injections to attenuate growth
d) All of these choices
10) Liao, Savulescu, and Sheehan argue that
a) Growth attenuation in disabled children is never morally permissible.
b) Growth attenuation in some disabled children is morally acceptable.
c) The surgical removal of breast buds in impaired children is morally permissible.
d) The surgical removal of the uterus in an impaired child is morally permissible.
11) Who argues that infants are not persons?
a) Liao
b) Robertson
c) Sheehan
d) Tooley
12) Who defends a conservative natural law position?
a) Liao
b) Robertson
c) Sheehan
d) Tooley
13) Who rejects the argument that the cost of treating newborns outweighs the benefits?
a) Liao
b) Robertson
c) Sheehan
d) Tooley
14) Who argues that it is reasonable to speak of a duty not to treat an impaired infant under
certain conditions?
a) Liao
b) Engelhardt
c) Tooley
d) Robertson
15) Who wrote of the legal concept of “wrongful life”?
a) Liao
b) Engelhardt
c) Tooley
d) Robertson
True/False Questions
1) Dr. Eduard Verhagen supports a policy allowing physicians to euthanize infants under certain
condition such as when suffering from hopeless and severe impairments leading only to a life
of “agonizing pain.”
2) Congenital impairments are inherited and can be passed on.
3) There is currently a cure for Down syndrome.
4) Amniocentesis carries no risks and is considered a routine procedure.
5) The natural law position holds that only fully functioning newborns can be considered human
persons.
6) Utilitarians do not consider killing impaired infants to be wrong in itself.
7) Kant believed that it would be wrong to will our own deaths.
8) Ethical theories rooted in identity politics draw a bright line between persons and non-
persons.
9) In “The ‘Ashley Treatment’”, Ashley’s parent’s claim that they had Ashley’s uterus removed
to prevent menstrual cramps.
10) Liao, Salvulescu, and Sheehan argue that the surgical removal of the uterus in a case like
Ashley’s is not justified.
11) ohn Robertson believes that the high personal and societal costs of treating impaired
newborns are sufficient reason to withhold treatment from such newborns.
12) Tristram Engelhardt Jr. believes that we may actually have a moral duty not to treat impaired
newborns if such treatment would only prolong a painful life or lead to a painful deat.
13) Engelhardt believes that children are not persons in the full sense.
14) Engelhardt believes that there could be a duty not to treat an impaired infant.
15) Engelhardt opposes the passive euthanization of children.