this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2024
369 points (98.4% liked)

196

16769 readers
2512 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

alt-text (full)

Screenshot of news:

“Dying boy, 15, gets wish: losing virginity Chicago Sun Times ^ | 12/23/01 | BY BENJAMIN ERRETT Posted on 12/23/2001, 6:26:24 AM by Mopp4

A terminally ill boy had his dying wish granted in Australia this month, but ethicists are still at odds over whether it was the right thing to do. The wish was not for a trip to Disneyland or to meet a famous sports star. Instead, the 15-year-old wanted to lose his virginity before he died of cancer. The boy, who remains anonymous but was called Jack by the Australian media, did not want his parents to know about his request. Because of his many years spent in the hospital, he had no girlfriend or female friends. Jack died last week, but not before having his last wish granted. Without the knowledge of his parents or hospital staff, friends arranged an encounter with a prostitute outside of hospital premises. All precautions were taken, and the organizers made sure the act was fully consensual. The issue has sparked fierce debate over the legal and ethical implications of granting the boy's request. By law, Jack was still a child, and the woman involved could in theory face charges for having sex with a minor. The debate was sparked by the hospital's child psychologist, who wrote a letter to "Life Matters," a radio show in which academics debate ethical and moral dilemmas. The scenario was presented in the abstract, with no details about the boy's identity.

"He had been sick for quite a long period, and his schooling was very disrupted, so he hadn't had many opportunities to acquire and retain friends, and his access to young women was pretty poor," the psychologist said recently in an interview with Australia's Daily Telegraph newspaper. "But he was very interested in young women and was experiencing that surge of testosterone that teenage boys have." Hospital staff initially wanted to pool donations to pay for a prostitute, but the ethical and legal implications prevented them from doing so. The psychologist presented members of the clergy with the dilemma and found no clear answer. "It really polarized them," he said. "About half said, 'What's your problem?' And the other half said [it] demeans women and reduces the sexual act to being just a physical one."

Dr. Stephen Leeder, dean of medicine at the University of Sydney and a "Life Matters" panelist, said the issue was a difficult one. "I pointed out that public hospitals operated under the expectation that they would abide by state law," he said. "While various things doubtless are done that are at the edge of that, it's important the public has confidence that the law will be followed." Jack's psychologist, who works with children in palliative care, said the desire was driven in part by a need for basic human contact. "In a child dying over a long period of time, there is often a condition we call 'skin hunger,'" he said. The terminally ill child yearns for non-clinical contact because "mostly when people touch them, it's to do something unpleasant, something that might hurt." Leeder called the diagnosis "improbable." Judy Lumby, the show's other panelist and the executive director of the New South Wales College of Nursing, argued that the details as presented made it abundantly clear the boy's wish ought to be granted. "I said that I would try my darndest as a nurse to do whatever I could to make sure his wish came true," she said. "I just think we are so archaic in the way we treat people in institutions. Certainly, if any of my three daughters were dying, I'd do whatever I could, and I'm sure that you would, too." National Post”

Source

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 128 points 1 week ago

Sounds like it worked out in the end, given the circumstances.
Agree with the university dean who said that hospitals have a particular obligation to live up to expectations that they'll follow the law where ethically permissable.
Hospitals have no duty to keep a patient from seeing a prostitute, only to minimize harm from the potentially illegal or dangerous activity.
Sounds like everyone did the right thing.

[–] cRazi_man@lemm.ee 127 points 1 week ago

The boy may not have had a girlfriend, but he clearly had friends who were good enough to do this for him. Heartwarming really.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 118 points 1 week ago (2 children)

His friends arranged it. There is no moral issue for the hospital or staff.

[–] sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone 63 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The moral issue would be with the prostitute for sleeping with a minor I thought

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 45 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Its not like it could mess up the kids life. There never was any harm to be done in this particular case.

[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 week ago (3 children)

the ONLY thing that I find gives me a side step was the statement:

"it demeans women and reduces the sexual act to just being a physical act"

I think it has some merit. Though I didn't actually pick up on the gender of the prostitute (I guess we're all assuming). It still breaks the importance of the emotional connection to a sexual partner as you're learning about early adulthood. I don't think real harm came to the boy in this instance particularly, but I couldn't imagine being that sex worker. I would do it, but shit, that's gotta follow you a little bit your entire life and something you would always think about. Probably would be my last "John" to be honest.

The other harm comes from people reading the article, especially young boys. It encourages the mindset that the sex act is the important thing one must conquer, not opening up and being vulnerable to a partner to share that experience with. It's super fucking tough though, like finding him just a date would be better but all the implications of what that would entail for the people involved is just heartbreaking.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Sex isn't always just a physical act, but it certainly can be. I've for sure had meaningless sex just for the fun of it. It isn't some sacred act. If for you it always has an emotional component, that's cool. It doesn't for everyone though. To say it's demeaning is implying that particular view is the only acceptable one, and it isn't. That quote came from a clergyman IIRC though, and he's welcome to his opinion, but it shouldn't be used to imply his view is the "correct" one.

[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Definitely agree and not trying to promote clergy mentality lol. I wasn't saying it was correct or demeaning, just gave me a side step because we're talking about a young boy and losing his virginity. I think sex work should be legalized across the board, but I doubt you would find many people that would encourage it to be available for a 15 year old or that it should be everyone's first sexual experience. There's a lot of mental and developmental problems that can come from sex being viewed as a transaction if the proper level of maturity isn't there.

Would be nice if we had actual data to look at or the opinions of the people in that field, if it was legalized we could actually have a discussion instead of pearl clutching or just anecdotal thoughts.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 2 points 6 days ago

I agree with you, except that this kid was dying. It doesn't really matter if they weren't fully mentally developed, and it also doesn't matter if they end up viewing sex in a way we think is bad. It can't hurt anything. They aren't going to grow up and have issues from the experience.

For a healthy 15 year old, yeah it isn't ideal. For a terminally I'll one, the only one who could be harmed long-term is the prostitute.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 33 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

The hospital staff wanted to raise money themselves to hire a prostitute for him, so yes, there very clearly was a moral question for them to consider, even if in the end they didn't go through with it personally.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 67 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Cool cool cool so that is kinda fucking heartbreaking :(

[–] bane_killgrind@slrpnk.net 10 points 1 week ago

Calling his emotional state "skin hunger" was definitely sabotaging his chances.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] zarathustra0@lemmy.world 53 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Surprisingly wholesome for 196.

Sometimes the rules need to be ignored to treat people with a little dignity.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 53 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I like how the religious people asked were either "yeah sex with kids is fine" or moralising about prostitution in general. None expressed any concern about the fact that an adult had sex with a minor, or even acknowledged that it could be an issue necessary to discuss. Almost like religious people are not the ones you should go to to find the answer to moral questions.

[–] TaviRider@reddthat.com 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I’m wondering why clergy were consulted. I can’t imagine a worse place to go for insight into the ethics of human sexuality. Was it a Catholic hospital?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] colin@lemmy.uninsane.org 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)

half of the clergy said "what's your problem", which would usually mean "the answer to whatever you just asked is so obviously 'no' that you're a bad person just for asking it: what's your problem". i have to respect that some topics are simply off-limits for some people: if you're going to someone asking for advice about a moral quandary and their convictions are strong enough they don't wanna discuss the topic beyond "hell no", i don't fault them for that.

[–] SmoochyPit@lemmy.ca 47 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I interpreted “what’s your problem” as “what’s the issue with doing it”, since the article says the issue “really polarized them”, and the other response was opposed to the action.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Fades@lemmy.world 49 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Who gives a FUCK what the clergy think???? Ask the scientists and be done with it, otherwise you may as well just open a damn suggestion box and let any old moron have their say.

The only experience clergy have here is the “sex with underage children” part.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago (20 children)

A lot of people think the clergy are good at figuring out ethical stuff. To be fair they get a lot of education on ethics in relation to their religion. So a clergy person who operates in good faith (haha but I couldn't think of a better way to state it) could actually be a good resource. One operating in bad faith though can do a lot of damage.

[–] exploitedamerican@lemm.ee 8 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Where the fuck were those conversations on ethics during the spanish inquisition, or the opening of the flood gates that was the catholic church pedophilia sexual abuse scandal that seems to never end? Or had they not figured out ethics at that point?

[–] Jamablaya@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

I read somewhere that one of Martin Luthers' demands on that paper he nailed to that church door was that priests quit fucking little boys. I have no idea if that's factual or not.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (10 children)

Unfortunately ethics education does not equal ethical actions. Ethics have also seriously evolved since the Inquisition.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Oestradiolo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 39 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Setting aside the ethics of it all, really seems like the psychologist could have just shut the fuck up and have it published on their own deathbed.

[–] Chiarottide@lemmy.world 35 points 1 week ago

The identity of everyone involved was protected, moral dilemmas are almost daily occurrences in medicine and there is a specific procedure for it. If every ethicist had to wait until on their deathbed to reveal their secrets the scientific community would suffer greatly and you would lose so many opportunities to make someone's life better

[–] SacralPlexus@lemmy.world 25 points 1 week ago

Strongly disagree. The patient remains anonymous so not a breach of confidentiality. Beyond that, there is value to society in everyone seeing and contemplating the ethics of a situation like this. Because it is an extreme, unusual circumstance it forces you to examine your moral and belief systems to try and determine what you would have done and what you believe is “right.” Such introspection is critical for all of us to grow and hopefully do the best thing when we are thrust into an unusual moral dilemma.

The unexamined life is not worth living.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Gullible@sh.itjust.works 39 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They might have made or ruined that prostitute’s month. That’s a heavy situation to be introduced to. Glad the kid got some amount of comfort in his final days.

[–] untorquer@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (8 children)

The way the article is written it looks like they focused heavily on consent. Judging by the deep focus on ethics and the professionalism expressed in this decision that presumably means consent for the sex worker as well. They were probably brought in on the discussion for a while before the session to work on boundaries and means.

None of this reads as a rush job.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] JPAKx4@lemmy.blahaj.zone 38 points 1 week ago (5 children)

This reminds me of the time where someone in Germany consented to being killed and canalized. Like it's obviously bad bc murder, but like, he also wanted it so like??? Like maybe the prostitute should have said no bc sex with a minor is wrong bc they can't consent, but at the same time nobody would be mad at the kid for wanting this.

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 33 points 1 week ago (4 children)

The age of consent in Australia is 16, and he was 15 and wouldn't have made it to that age. I think as far as maturity goes, when he was facing death and had to come to terms with that, that he would meet the burden of consenting to the act ~12 months early.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 week ago

IDK cuz you can’t encourage terminal cancer but - however preposterous it sounds - you could encourage a cannibalization kink?

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Wild

Disturbing (Wiki screengrab)

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] TeraByteMarx@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 1 week ago (2 children)

When I worked in a brothel an alarming amount of father's, uncles, brothers etc. would bring in underage boys, or more frequently young men who has just turned 18. Like they thought it would set them up better in life, like finishing college of something. Gender roles are horrible for everyone involved. Support kid getting dying wish but seriously question if maybe things could be better because there's much more to life than sex

[–] unmagical@lemmy.ml 19 points 1 week ago

I grew up in an evangelical Christian household. I was taught constantly that sex was an amazing experience and basically the best fun someone could have without drugs, but you definitely weren't allowed to do it. This message was repeated for 20 some years.

When I hit puberty this meant I got the illustrious combo of constantly thinking about sex and constantly feeling guilty about thinking about sex.

When I finally did have sex it was fun, but like, no where near as exciting as it had been hyped up to be. It was kind of a let down, but at least I had that knowledge now.

I can absolutely understand why young men fall into the incel trap or harbour objectifying opinions of others. And if your father fell into that trap, well, you're gonna have troubled teenage years that will be even more difficult to find normalcy from.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Determinism@kbin.earth 19 points 1 week ago

Wow.

EDIT: Some of the comments on the repost on that site, 400 comments, are great.

Well, that explains it. I always wondered what Socialized Medicine was... now I know...

People used to get married all the time at 15. What ever happened to traditional values?

It seems like this site is very religious, so there is lots of moralizing, claiming that the boy had done a "mortal sign" among other things.

[–] Jamablaya@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago

This should have never been in the news, publicized or judged.

[–] Ethoteric@lemm.ee 14 points 1 week ago

Until you think of humans as merely the biological ape creatures we are, free from Western social mores and norms and free from laws that do not check for situational nuances, then you cannot fully understand how this is not an ethical dilemma.

[–] user224@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 1 week ago

I've seen this post when it was posted, there were still no comments. I waited, read the comments now, and I still don't know how to feel about this.

load more comments
view more: next ›