Terrible Moral Dilemma

Bobby and Kathy are both 35 years old. They met in college and fell in love with each other. They married a year after college graduation. They absolutely adore each other and couldn't be happier. They plan to have children. As of now they have been married for 13 years.

One night, tragedy struck. Kathy got into a car accident due to a reckless driver. She survived many broken bones and massive blood loss. Unfortunately the hospital treating her did not have her blood type. Luckily her husband just so happened to be her blood type. The doctors quickly scanned his blood for any abnormalities and committed a transfusion.

Kathy would live and would recover in a few weeks. However, the doctor pulled aside Bobby for a serious talk. The doctors found something rather unusual about Bobby's blood. His DNA had similar genetic coding to that of his wife.

In short, Bobby was biologically related to his wife. He was her half-brother and she was his half-sister. Completely shocked by the news, Bobby and Kathy face a terrible moral dilemma. They truly love each other and despite the news their love for each other has not changed; however it has been shaken. To compound their problems, they found out that Kathy is two weeks pregnant. Should they continue to be husband and wife? Or should they divorce and try to live on without each other?

Why do you think?

I had this question for Philosophy class today. Our class got into a terrible debate (more like war). I wonder what people on this forum think?

Well first, by 'half' do you mean step-brother and sister?

Or do you mean they were both born or conceived by the same man or woman?

If they're just related legally, it's nothing.

It's a bit of a tricky situation really. I mean, the fact that they didn't know they had ANY connection leads me to believe that they had no integral part of family life or bonding together, so there's no REAL sense of family or incestual behaviour, besides that of the definition.

So I'm leaning slightly toward it being ok. Purely because they weren't in a family situation they were complete strangers to one another. Family would likely never have come out had it not been for the blood.

-AC

They are both conceived by the same father or mother.

(The worksheet didn't specify. Sorry)

They love each other, keep going.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Well first, by 'half' do you mean step-brother and sister?

Or do you mean they were both born or conceived by the same man or woman?

If they're just related legally, it's nothing.

It's a bit of a tricky situation really. I mean, the fact that they didn't know they had ANY connection leads me to believe that they had no integral part of family life or bonding together, so there's no REAL sense of family or incestual behaviour, besides that of the definition.

So I'm leaning slightly toward it being ok. Purely because they weren't in a family situation they were complete strangers to one another. Family would likely never have come out had it not been for the blood.

-AC

but if there is genetic evidence to prove a blood relation that identifies a common biological parent then it is incestual and more than that...can result in a higher risk of genetic mutation in the baby that is due

so for one...it could be illegal...2...is could be dangerous to the child and 3...it is not really socially acceptable behaviour

i'd say break it off....

Break up a 13 year marriage because although you both love each other you just found out your half bro and sis?

If it's socially acceptable to be gay....why wouldn't it be socially acceptable to commit incest?

uuuhh...because its not legal...and its physically genetically dangerous

sincs they didn't know about it, why to change anything
they love each other, they are together happy.
screw dna tests 😖

and the only bad thing about it is that eventual children are more possible to inherit some genetic desise, but since she's already pregant, i see no point for breaking their life.

Originally posted by jaden101
uuuhh...because its not legal...and its physically genetically dangerous

but WHY isn't it illegal?

and how is it genetically dangerous?

If it was me I think I'd get divorced.

And I don't know if sleeping with your sister is illegal, but marrying your sister is.

coz most of genetics diseases is coused by recesive gens.
eg:
the cases of hemofilia in british royal family. 😐

They could always get an abortion.

if they had no inkling beforehand i say let em be together, its hard enough to find someone to love in this world...

they commited no crime, they did not know about their connection...

let em be...

Technically they did commit a crime. They got married.

Hemophilia is a hereditary disease passed down from someone who already had the disease. If both people are free of genetic diseases...then there's really no reason to believe having sex with a family member who is clean is going to produce a disease ridden child.

In fact, incest has occurred for thousands of years in numerous civilizations because "royalty" or those considered to be "superior" to the normal population didn't believe in diluting their pure blood.

That's like saying you should never sleep with an African because you'll either get AIDS or Cicle-Cell Anemia.

Originally posted by jaden101
but if there is genetic evidence to prove a blood relation that identifies a common biological parent then it is incestual and more than that...can result in a higher risk of genetic mutation in the baby that is due

so for one...it could be illegal...2...is could be dangerous to the child and 3...it is not really socially acceptable behaviour

i'd say break it off....

Well first off lets rule out the genetic mutation side because they didn't know they were related when they had sex.

Secondly, incestual or not, it's hardly as bad as brother/sister, father/daughter incest. It's two people related by one parent who had NO clue they were even related to each other upon meeting.

-AC

Omg. This is really sad!
To discover that the person you love is your half bro or sis. As far as I'm concern they should not have kids, cause the children will get one of those non-treatable diasise and the love they had will trun to hell. But if the love is so strong they should stay together! If they want so much kids they can adopt one, or two.
But they should not separate, not AT ALL. As some one else said before me the fact that they didn't grow up together as bother and sister makes it easy.

If they love eachother then they should definitely stay together... screw the law.

Having kids is another matter which I know nothing about. But if a child coming from an incestuous relationship is dangerous, perhaps they should adopt...

Originally posted by Draco69
They could always get an abortion.

Originally posted by Linkalicious
Hemophilia is a hereditary disease passed down from someone who already had the disease. If both people are free of genetic diseases...then there's really no reason to believe having sex with a family member who is clean is going to produce a disease ridden child.

In fact, incest has occurred for thousands of years in numerous civilizations because "royalty" or those considered to be "superior" to the normal population didn't believe in diluting their pure blood.

That's like saying you should never sleep with an African because you'll either get AIDS or Cicle-Cell Anemia.

example
a guy has an ill gen
and has too kids
and then the kids get married and have childer
it is possible that the granchild of the first guy has a disease which didn't show up in any of other ppl.